Skip to main content

Full text of "The Catholic controversy"

See other formats

r/  ixv 





Library  of  St.  Francis  De  Sales, 



Very  Rev.  H.  B.  Canon  MAC  KEY,  O.S.B. 


Right  Rev.  JOHN   CUTHBERT   HEDLEY,  O.S.B. 

.  Bishop  of  Newport 


Edited  from  the  Autograph  MSS.  at  Rome  and  at  Annbcy. 


LONDON:  BURNS  &  OATES,  Limited. 



t  - '     / 

/    /    ' 


The  following  Treatise  is  the  message  or  teaching  of 
S.  Francis  de  Sales  to  the  Calvinists  of  the  Chablais, 
reluctantly  written  out  because  they  would  not  go  to 
hear  him  preach.  The  Saint  neither  published  it  nor 
named  it.  We  have  called  it  "  The  Catholic  Contro- 
versy," partly  to  make  our  title  correspond  as  nearly 
as  possible  with  the  title  "Les  Controverses,"  given 
by  the  French  editor  when  the  work  was  posthumously 
published,  chiefly  because  its  scope  is  to  state  and 
justify  the  Catholic  doctrine  as  against  Calvin  and 
his  fellow-heretics.  It  is  the  Catholic  position,  and 
the  defence  of  Catholicism  as  such.  At  the  same 
time  it  is  incidentally  the  defence  of  Christianity, 
because  his  justification  of  Catholicism  lies  just  in 
this  that  it  alone  is  Christianity  ;  and  his  argument 
turns  entirely  on  the  fundamental  question  of  the 
exclusive  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church,  as  the 
sole  representative  of  Christianity  and  Christ.  This 
is  the  real  point  at  issue  between  the  Church  and 
the  sects,  and  therefore  he,  as  officer  of  the  Church, 
begins  by  traversing  the  commission  of  those  who 
teach  against  her.  He  shows  at  length,  in  Part  I., 
that  she  alone  has  Mission,  that  she  alone  is  sent  to 
teach,  and  that  thus  their  authority  is  void,  and  their 
teaching  but  the  vain  teaching  of  men. 

SEP  8    1982 

vi  Translator  s  P7^eface. 

This  teaching  he  tests  in  Part  II.  by  the  Eule  of 
Faith.  Assuming  as  common  ground  that  the  Word 
of  God  is  the  Eule  of  Faith,  he  shows  that  the  so- 
called  reformers  have  composed  a  false  Scripture,  and 
that  they  err  also  in  rejecting  Tradition  or  the  un- 
written Word  of  God.  And  then,  proceeding  to  the 
central  point  of  his  case,  he  shows  that  while  the 
Word  of  God  is  the  formal  Eule  of  Faith,  is  the 
external  standard  by  which  faith  is  to  be  measured 
and  adjusted,  there  is  need  of  a  judge  who  may 
explain,  apply,  and  declare  the  meaning  of  the  Word. 
That  judge  is  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.  She  is  thus 
the  necessary  exponent  of  the  Eule  of  right-believing, 
and  each  of  the  voices  by  which  she  utters  her 
decision  becomes  also  a  part  of  the  Eule  of  Faith,  viz., 
her  own  general  body,  Councils,  Fathers,  and  her 
supreme  Head  and  mouthpiece,  the  Pope,  the  successor 
of  S.  Peter  and  Vicar  of  Christ.  Miracles  and  harmony 
of  doctrines  may  be  considered  the  complement  of 
the  Eule  of  Faith.  In  all  these  matters  the  Saint 
proves  conclusively  that  the  Catholic  Church  alone 
fulfils  the  necessary  conditions. 

In  Part  III.  he  comes  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Church 
in  detail,  but  of  this  Part  there  only  remain  to  us  three 
chapters  on  the  Sacraments  and  an  Essay  on  Purgatory. 

This  may  suffice  as  to  the  aim  and  subject-matter 
of  the  Treatise.  Of  its  intrinsic  merits  the  author's 
name  is  sufficient  guarantee,  but  we  add  more  direct 
testimony  because  it  is  a  new  revelation  of  the  Saint. 

The  Bull  of  Doctorate  calls  it  "  a  complete  demon- 
stration of  Catholic  doctrine."  Alibrandi,  in  the  Pro- 
cessus, speaks  of  "  the  incredible  power  of  his  words," 
and  says  in  particular  that  no  other  writer,  as  far  as 

Translator  s  Preface.  vii 

he  knows,  has  "so  conclusively,  fully,  and  lucidly 
explained  the  Church's  teaching  on  the  primacy,  in- 
fallible magistermiii,  and  other  prerogatives  of  the 
successors  of  S.  Peter."  Hamon,  in  his  Life  of  the 
Saint,^  says :  "  If  we  consider  it,  not  as  disfigured  by 
its  first  editor,  who  made  it  unrecognisable  in  trying 
to  perfect  it,  but  as  it  left  its  author's  hands,  we  see 
that  it  is  of  inestimable  value,  that  it  presents  the 
proofs  of  the  Catholic  Church  with  an  irresistible 
force."  Its  first  editor,  Leonard,  says :  "  We  are 
entirely  of  the  opinion  that  this  book  deserves  to  be 
esteemed  beyond  all  the  others  he  has  composed." 
The  Mother  de  Chaugy,  superior  of  Annecy,  in  her 
circular  letter  of  1661  to  the  Houses  of  the  Visitation, 
writes  thus :  "  It  is  considered  that  this  Treatise  is 
calculated  to  produce  as  much  fruit  amongst  heretics 
for  their  conversion  as  the  Introduction  to  a  Devout 
Life  amongst  Catholics  for  devotion.  And  their  Lord- 
ships our  Judges  (for  the  cause  of  Canonization)  say 
that  S.  Athanasius,  S.  Ambrose  and  S.  Augustine  have 
not  more  zealously  defended  the  faith  than  our  Blessed 
Father  has  done." 

Cardinal  Zacchetti,  in  introducing  the  cause  of 
Beatification,  gives  a  furtlier  proof  of  its  excellence 
in  describing  the  effect  it  had  on  the  obstinate  men  for 
whom  it  was  composed :  "  When  the  inhabitants  of 
the  Chablais  were  forbidden  by  magisterial  decree  to 
attend  his  sermons  or  frequent  his  company,  he  began 
to  fight  with  his  pen,  and  wrote  to  them  a  letter 
accompanied  with  certain  selected  arguments  for  the 
Catholic  faith,  by  which  he  recalled  so  great  a  multi- 
tude of  wandering  souls  to  the  Church  that  he  happily 

*  I.  167. 

viii  Translator  s  Preface, 

raised  up  and  restored  first  Thonon  and  then  the 
other  parishes." 

And  the  power  of  the  work  lies  not  in  its  substance 
only  but  also  in  its  manner.  It  is  true  controversy, 
yet  unlike  all  other  controversy.  He  seems  to  follow 
the  same  method  as  in  his  practical  theology,  making 
the  difficult  easy,  turning  the  rough  into  smooth. 
What  S.  Thomas  and  the  grand  theologians  have  done 
for  learned  men,  S.  Francis  has  done  for  the  general 
people.  He  ever  seems  to  have  little  ones  in  his 
mind,  to  be  speaking  and  writing  for  them.  We  see 
in  this  Treatise  the  leading  of  the  same  spirit  which 
made  him  love  to  preach  to  children,  and  to  nuns, 
and  to  the  poor  country  people  ;  which  made  him  keep 
in  his  own  establishment  and  teach  with  his  own  lips 
the  poor  deaf-mute  of  whom  we  read  in  his  Life.  It 
is  in  great  measure  this  spirit  which  gives  him  such 
an  affinity  with  our  age  in  that  sympathy  with  the 
weak  and  miserable  which  is  one  of  its  best  and 
noblest  tendencies.  And  here  again  we  have  a  strik- 
ing proof  of  his  genius.  "  It  is  perhaps  harder,"  say 
the  Bollandists  in  their  petition  for  his  Doctorate 
(xxxv),  "to  write  correctly  on  dogmatic,  moral,  and 
ascetic  subjects  in  such  a  way  as  to  be  understood  by 
the  unlearned  and  not  despised  by  the  learned,  than 
to  compose  the  greater  works  of  theology;  it  is  a 
difficulty  only  overcome  by  the  best  men." 

We  must  now  satisfy  our  readers  that  we  offer  them 
a  faithful  text  of  a  work  of  such  extreme  value.  This 
is  the  more  necessary  on  the  ground  that  it  is  an 
unfinished  and  posthumous  production,  and  it  is 
especially  incumbent  upon  us,  because  we  put  forward 
our  edition  as  representing  in  English  ^  first  edition^ 

Translator  s  Preface,  ix 

the  first  printing  of  the  true  text.  Ours  is  veritably 
a  new  work  by  S.  Francis  brought  out  in  this  nine- 
teenth century. 

The  original  was  written  on  fugitive  separate 
sheets,  which  were  copied  and  distributed  week  by 
week,  sometimes  being  placarded  in  the  streets  and 
squares.  The  Saint  did  not  consider  them  of  suffi- 
cient importance  to  be  mentioned  in  the  list  of  his 
works  contained  in  the  Preface  to  the  Love  of  God, 
but  they  were  carefully  written,  and  he  preserved  a 
copy  more  or  less  complete  which  bears  marks  of 
being  revised  by  him  later,  and  which  he  speaks  of 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Vienne  (L.  170),  as  "studies" 
suitable  for  use  in  a  future  work  on  "a  method  of 
converting  heretics  by  holy  preaching." 

The  first  we  hear  of  a  portion  of  these  sheets  is  in 
the  "  Life  "  by  his  nephew,  Charles  Auguste  de  Sales, 
who  gives  a  rather  full  and  very  accurate  analysis  of 
them.  They  are  labelled  in  his  "  Table  des  Preuves  " 
(63)  as  follows:  "Fragment  of  the  work  of  S.  Francis 
de  Sales,  Provost  of  Geneva,  on  the  Marks  of  the 
Church  and  the  Primacy  of  S.  Peter ;  written  partly 
with  his  own  hand  when  he  was  at  Thonon  for  the 
conversion  of  the  Chablais.  We  have  the  original  on 
paper."  These  fragments  were  the  chief  part  of  the 
article  on  Scripture,  the  article  on  Tradition,  the  chief 
part  of  the  article  on  the  Pope,  and  half  that  on 
the  Church.  The  parts  "written  with  his  own  hand" 
were  those  on  Scripture  and  Tradition. 

This  abstract  was  made  before  1633  (^^^  Saint  died 
at  the  end  of  1622),  and  exactly  a  quarter  of  a  century 
after  that  date,  when  Charles  Auguste  had  been  bishop 
fourteen  years,  he  "  discovered  "  the  whole  manuscript 

X  Translator  s  Preface, 

as  we  have  it  now,  except  a  comparatively  small 
portion  which  was,  and  is.  preserved  at  Annecy.  The 
MS.  was  contained  with  other  papers  in  a  plain  deal 
box  which  for  greater  security  during  those  disturbed 
times  had  been  cemented  into  the  thick  wall  of  an 
archive-chamber.  Of  this  fact  he  gave  the  following 
attestation : — 

"  We  testify  to  all  whom  it  may  concern  that  on 
the  14th  May  of  the  present  year  1658,  when  we  were 
in  our  chateau  of  La  Thuille,  from  which  we  had  been 
absent  fourteen  years,  and  were  turning  over  the  records 
of  our  archives,  we  found  twelve  large  manuscript  books, 
in  the  hand  of  the  venerable  servant  of  God  and  our 
predecessor,  Francis  de  Sales,  in  which  are  treated 
many  points  of  theology  which  are  in  controversy 
between  Catholic  doctors  and  the  heretics,  especially 
concerning  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Eoman  Pontiff 
and  Yicar  of  Jesus  Christ  and  successor  of  Blessed 
Peter.  We  also  found  three  other  books  on  the  same 
matters,  which  were  written  by  another  hand  except 
as  to  three  pages  which  are  in  the  hand  of  the  afore- 
said servant  of  God.  All  these  we  consigned  to  the 
Eev.  Pather  Andrew  de  Chaugy,  Minim,  Procurator 
in  the  cause  of  Beatification  of  the  servant  of  God."  * 

Father  de  Chaugy,  who  sent,  or  probably  took,  them 
to  Eome,  gives  the  following  attestation.     The  names  of 

*  The  Bisliop  does  not  mention  the  sheets  he  had  handled  before 
1633,  but  we  have  no  doubt,  from  internal  evidence,  that  they  formed 
part  of  what  he  found  in  1658,  though  they  were  probably  placed  in 
the  deal  coffer  by  another  hand.  They  are  all  together  at  the  end  of 
the  MS.,  except  that  the  part  on  the  Pope  has  been  brought  next  to 
that  part  of  the  autograph  which  treats  of  the  same  subject,  thus 
placing  the  parts  on  Scripture  and  Tradition  one  step  away  from  their 
companion  sheets. 

Translator  s  Preface,  xi 

witnesses  will  easily  be  recognised  by  those  who  are 
familiar  with  the  Saint's  life : — 

"  I,  Brother  Andrew  de  Chaugy,  Minim,  Procurator 
of  the  Religious  of  the  Visitation  for  the  Canonization 
of  the  venerable  servant  of  God,  M.  de  Sales,  Bishop 
and  Prince  of  Geneva,  certify  that  I  have  procured  to 
be  witnessed  that  these  present  Manuscripts,  which 
treat  of  the  authority  and  primacy  of  S.  Peter  and  of 
the  sovereign  Pontiffs  his  successors,  are  written  and 
dictated  in  the  hand  and  style  of  the  venerable  servant 
of  God,  M.  Francis  de  Sales. 

"  Those  who  have  witnessed  them  are  M.  the  Marquis 
de  Lullin,  Governor  of  the  Chablais  ;  the  Reverend 
Father  Prior  of  the  Carthusians  of  Ripaille ;  M.  Sera- 
phin.  Canon  of  Geneva,  aged  8o  years ;  M.  Jannus, 
Superior  of  Brens  in  Chablais ;  M.  Gard,  Canon  of  the 
Collegiate  Church  of  Our  Lady  at  Annecy ;  M.  F. 
Fauvre,  who  was  twenty  years  valet  to  the  servant  of 

"All  the  above  witnesses  certify  that  the  said 
writings  are  of  the  hand  and  composition  of  this  great 
Bishop  of  Geneva,  and  they  even  certify  that  they  have 
heard  him  preach  part  of  them  when  he  converted 
the  countries  of  Gex  and  Chablais." 

M.  de  Castagnery  and  M.  de  Blancheville  testify 
that  "part  was  written  by  the  Saint,  and  that  the 
other  part,  written  by  the  hand  of  his  secretary,  was 
corrected  by  him." 

From  the  many  other  attestations,  given  by  the 
chief  officials,  ecclesiastical  and  civil,  of  the  diocese 
and  county,  we  select  a  part  of  one  given  by  the  Rev. 
Father  Louis  Rofavier,  Chief  Secretary  to  the  Commis- 
sion of  Beatification  and  Canonization. 

xii  Translator  s  Preface, 

"...  Amongst  other  most  authentic  papers  there 
were  found  some  cahiers  in  folio,  written  by  the  Saint's 
own  hand,  and  others  by  a  foreign  hand  but  noted  and 
corrected  by  him,  which  proved  to  be  one  of  the 
Treatises  of  Controversy  composed  by  him  during  his 
mission  to  the  Chablais  .  .  .  which  Treatise  was  in- 
serted in  the  Acts,  and  produced  under  requisition,  that 
the  court  of  Eome  might  have  due  regard  to  so  excellent 
a  work  in  defence  of  the  Holy  Koman  Church.  The 
requisition  and  production  having  been  made  it  was 
judged  fit  to  send  the  original  to  our  Holy  Father  Pope 
Alexander  YII.  ...  I  have  had  the  honour  of  hand- 
ling it  and  of  inserting  it  in  the  Acts,  and  moreover  of 
having  a  faithful  copy  of  it  made  to  be  hereafter  pub- 
lished." The  Marquis  de  Sales  speaks  of  "two  or 
three  copies." 

The  autograph,  with  the  attestations  in  original, 
was  deposited  by  the  Pope  in  the  archives  of  the  Chigi 
family  to  which  he  belonged ;  and  there  we  will  leave 
it  for  the  present  while  we  follow  the  fortunes  of  the 
copy  which  had  been  made  for  publication.  It  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  Leonard  of  Paris,  editor  of  the 
Saint's  other  works,  who  brought  it  out  in  1672.  We 
have  only  to  endorse  M.  Hamon's  above  quoted  con- 
demnation of  this  edition.  Leonard  himself  says  : 
"  We  have  not  added  or  diminished  or  changed  any- 
thing in  the  substance  of  the  matter,  and  only  softened 
a  few  of  the  words."  But  such  an  editor  puts  his  own 
meaning  on  the  expressions  he  uses.  As  a  fact  there 
is  not  a  single  page  or  half-page  which  does  not  contain 
serious  omissions,  additions,  and  faulty  alterations  of 
matters  more  or  less  substantial.  The  verbal  changes 
are  to  be  counted  by  thousands  ;  in  fact  the  nerve  is 

Translator's  Preface.  xiil 

quite  taken  out  of  the  expression,  the  terse,  vigorous 
and  personal  sixteenth  century  language  of  the  man  of 
genius  being  buried  under  the  trivial  manner  of  the 
everyday  writer  employed  by  L(^onard  eighty  years 
later.  The  style  and  wording  of  the  original  make  it  a 
monument  of  early  French  literature  and  the  nascent 
powers  of  the  French  tongue. 

Leonard,  again,  has  garbled  the  Saint's  quotations, 
and  almost  habitually  given  the  wrong  references  to 
the  Fathers.  In  the  MS.  the  citations  are  in  almost 
every  case  correct  as  to  the  sense  though  free  as  to  the 
words,  and  the  references  are  most  exact,  though  too 
hastily  and  briefly  jotted  down  to  be  of  much  use  to 
a  careless  and  self-sufficient  editor. 

Finally,  Leonard  has  made  most  serious  mistakes 
as  to  order.  He  has  quite  failed  to  grasp  the  true 
division  of  Part  II.,  simple  and  logical  as  it  is.  He 
has  mingled  in  almost  inextricable  confusion  the 
sections  on  the  Church,  the  Councils,  the  Fathers, 
miracles,  and  reason,*  he  has  unnecessarily  repeated 
sections  on  Scripture  and  on  the  Indefectibility  of  the 
Church,  while  saying  no  word  of  a  second  recension 
of  the  section  on  the  Pope  which  contains  some 
important  additions  to  the  first.  He  has  dragged 
out  of  their  proper  places  parts  on  the  unity  of  the 
Church,  on  miracles,  and  on  the  analogy  of  faith,  and 
thrust  them  respectively  into  the  sections  on  the 
Pope,  on  the  sanctity  of  the  Church,  and  on  the 
Fathers.     In  some  places  he  alters  the  past  tense  into 

*  For  instance,  Discours  XLVI.  is  made  np  of  a  part  on  the  Fathers, 
a  part  on  the  analogy  of  faith,  and  two  parts,  properly  distinct  from 
one  another,  on  the  unity  of  the  Church.  At  each  change  he  puts 
a  note  to  apologise  for  the  Saint's  digressions. 

XIV  Translator^ s  Preface, 

the  future  to  suit  his  changes,  instead  of  letting  him- 
self be  guided  back  to  the  true  order,  and  when  he 
finds  the  Saint  speaking  of  the  last  Part  as  Part  III. 
he  drops  the  numeral  rather  than  give  up  his  mistake 
in  making  it  Part  IV.  He  says  the  division  into 
three  parts  is  the  Saint's  own.  So  it  is ;  but  Leonard 
does  not  follow  it.  He  makes  four  parts,  dividing 
Part  II.  into  two,  and  then  goes  on  to  blame  S. 
Francis  for  making  a  sub-section  into  a  section.  He 
divides  the  Treatise  into  ^' discours''  which  is  just 
what  they  were  not.  They  had  been ;  that  is,  the 
book  was  worked  up  from  sermons,  but  the  Saint's 
very  point  was  to  turn  these  into  ordinary  writings, 
and  he  always  speaks  of  his  own  divisions  as  chapters 
and  articles. 

Such  was  Leonard's  edition  of  1672,  and  we  find 
no  further  edition  until  that  of  Blaise  in  182 1,  which 
is  merely  a  reprint  as  far  as  the  Saint's  own  words 
go.  It  has  thus  almost  all  the  faults  of  the  first 
edition,  with  such  deliberate  further  alterations  as 
approved  themselves  to  the  Galilean  editor.  Some  of 
the  quotations  are  verified  and  references  corrected, 
the  discredit  of  the  mistakes  being  attributed  to  the 
author  instead  of  the  first  editor.  The  notes  are  the 
special  feature,  the  special  disgrace,  of  this  edition. 
The  editor  cannot  forgive  S.  Francis  for  upholding  the 
full  authority  of  the  Pope,  and  the  true  principles  of 
the  Church  with  regard  to  such  matters  as  miracles 
and  heresy ;  and  his  notes  on  the  chapters  treating 
of  these  subjects  are  full  of  such  expressions  as  these : 
"  the  saintly  author's  innumerable  negligences  ;  " 
"  facts  whose  falsehood  is  generally  recognised ; " 
"  this  sketch  of  the  life  of  S.  Peter  must  be  corrected 

Translator's  Preface,  xv 

by  reference  to  Fleury  and  others ; "  "  with  what  supe- 
riority Bossuet  treats  the  question  ! "  "  the  Saint  here  " 
(speaking  of  the  shameless  Marot)  "  quits  his  usual 
moderation ; "  "  there  reigns  such  an  obscurity,  such 
confusion  in  his  citations ; "  "  he  has  quoted  wrongly 
according  to  his  custom ;  "  "this  miracle  is  no  better  wit- 
nessed than  most ;  "  "  the  relation  of  so  many  miracles 
shows  that  in  his  time  there  was  little  criticism ;  " 
''  here  he  argues  in  a  vicious  circle."  Blaise's  chief 
indignation  is  reserved  for  the  famous  list  of  papal 
titles,  on  which  he  permits  himself  the  following 
remark,  at  the  end  of  a  note  of  three  pages :  "  S. 
Francis  de  Sales  has  collected  at  hazard  fifty  tiJes 
accorded  to  the  Apostolic  See.  It  would  have  been 
easy  to  augment  the  number  without  having  recourse 
to  forged  records,  false  decretals,  and  a  modern  doctor, 
and  still  that  would  not  be  found  which  is  sought  for 
with  so  much  ardour." 

We  see  how  low  the  credit  of  the  work  must  have 
been  brought  by  a  corrupt  text  and  such  annotations 
as  these.  It  was  not  till  1833  that  the  publication 
by  Blaise,  in  a  supplementary  volume,  of  part  of  the 
section  on  papal  authority  began  to  give  an  idea  of 
the  way  in  which  the  Saint  had  been  misrepresented. 
Blaise's  naive  commendation  of  this  part  is  the 
condemnation  of  all  the  rest,  which  is  neither  better 
nor  worse  than  the  section  he  amended :  "  this  piece 
already  forms  part  of  our  collection  of  the  Works  in 
the  '  Controversies/  but  so  disfigured  that  we  do  not 
hesitate  to  offer  it  here  as  unpublished  {inddite)!^ 
What  he  did  for  a  part  we  have  done,  in  an  English 
version,  for  the  whole.  Vives  in  1858  and  Migne  in 
1 86 1  brought  out  editions  in  which  the  new  part  was 

xvi  Translator  s  Preface. 

printed  and  which  had  the  grace  to  omit  the  Gallican 
notes,  but  otherwise  the  text  remained  the  same  as 
in  the  previous  editions,  no  serious  attempt  apparently 
being  made  to  follow  up  Blaise's  discovery.  Even 
the  Abb^  Baudry,  who  spent  his  life  in  collecting, 
throughout  France  and  Northern  Italy,  materials  bear- 
ing on  the  life  and  works  of  S.  Francis,  and  who 
made  researches  in  the  Vatican  Library,  only  got  so 
far  as  to  have  heard  that  the  autograph  was  in  the 
Chigi  Library.  It  was  brought  forward  at  the  Vatican 
Council,  and  made  an  immense  impression  upon  the 
Fathers.  But  it  was  reserved  for  the  present  pub- 
lishers and  translator  to  have  the  singular  honour  of 
resuscitating  this  glorious  work,  and  of  bringing  it  out 
in  its  true  and  full  beauty. 

This  autograph,  still  preserved  in  the  Chigi  Library, 
is  a  richly  bound  volume  of  foolscap  size  containing 
155  sheets  numbered  on  one  side,  thus  making  310 
pages.  It  is  in  bold  writing,  perfectly  clear  and  easy 
to  read,  but  with  corrections  and  slips.  Nearly  every 
page  has  a  cross  at  the  top.  The  arranging  and 
numbering  of  the  sheets  is  not  the  Saint's,  and  there 
is  much  disorder  here.  There  are  some  repetitions, 
chiefly  on  the  Pope  and  on  Scripture,  and  slight  varia- 
tions, as  might  be  expected  in  a  work  composed  as  this 
was,  the  Saint  probably  making  more  than  one  copy 
himself.  We  call  it  the  autograph ;  two  portions  of 
it,  however,  are  not  autograph,  but,  as  the  attesta- 
tions say,  written  by  a  secretary,  and  only  noted  and 
corrected  by  the  Saint; — viz.  (i.)  sheets  76  to  90, 
containing  the  chief  part  of  the  section  on  Purgatory : 
(2.)  one  of  the  two  recensions  of  the  part  on  the 
Pope,   and   about   half    the   section   on    the    Church, 

Translator' s  Preface,  xvii 

sheets  121  to  155.  We  mention  this  in  order  to  be 
strictly  accurate,  but  there  is  no  difference  to  be  made 
between  the  autograph  and  the  non-autograph  parts. 
All  the  sheets  were  together,  the  section  on  Purgatory 
is  taken  up  by  the  Saint  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence 
and  completed  by  himself,  the  non-autograph  part 
on  the  Church  fits  exactly  into  the  autograph  part, 
was  analysed  by  Charles  Auguste  as  the  Saint's  work 
within  ten  years  after  his  death,  and  contains  two 
chapters  which  occur  again  in  autograph  in  Part  I. 
The  two  recensions  of  the  part  on  the  Pope  only 
differ  in  order  and  in  a  few  sentences,  those  on  Scrip- 
ture are  both  in  the  Saint's  hand.  The  non-autograph 
part  on  the  Church  is  extremely  difficult  to  read,  being 
badly  written  in  German  characters  and  badly  spelt. 

With  the  autograph  is  a  co^y,  of  the  same  date, 
bound  in  the  same  way,  and  very  possibly  one  of  the 
several  copies  spoken  of  by  the  Marquis  De  Sales. 
The  writing  is  like  print,  large  and  clear,  except  in 
the  last  part,  containing  the  second  recension  on  the 
Pope  and  half  the  section  on  the  Church,  which  are 
written  in  a  cramped  hand,  and  being  copied  from 
the  difficult  German  character  are  full  of  misspells 
and  grammatical  errors.  The  copy  contains  207 
sheets,  numbered  only  on  one  side,  forming  414 
pages.  It  is  not  quite  complete,  omitting  the  chief 
part  of  the  article  on  Scripture,  the  first  half  of  that 
on  the  Church,  and  the  whole  of  Tradition.  Except 
that  it  is  not  complete  this  copy  is  an  exact  transcript 
of  the  original,  with  which  it  has  been  most  carefully 
collated.  Our  version  has  been  made  from  this  copy, 
graciously  lent  to  us  by  Prince  Chigi.  The  translator's 
brother  has  transcribed  for  him  the  omitted  parts. 
III.  h 

xviii  Translator's  Preface, 

This  Eoman  MS.  is  our  chiei  but  not  our  only 
source.  There  is  also  an  autograph  portion  of  the 
work  at  Annecy,  certified  by  the  Vicar  General  of  the 
diocese,  Poncet,  in  an  attestation  given  June  1 1  th, 
1875,  and  by  the  Mother  Superior,  exactly  fitting  in 
to  the  other  MS.  It  contains  some  further  most 
important  portions  on  the  Pope  and  on  the  Church, 
and  almost  all  we  have  on  Councils.  This  autograph 
has  been  printed  for  private  circulation  in  the  Pro- 
cessus, of  which  we  have  procured  a  certified  copy. 

Our  first  duty  was  to  arrange  the  Treatise  in  its 
proper  order.  Here  the  autograph  and  the  copy  were 
different  from  each  other  and  from  the  printed  text. 
The  parts  misplaced  had  to  be  brought  back,  and  the 
whole  distributed  according  to  the  logical  plan  laid 
down  by  the  saintly  author  in  the  introduction  to  Part 
II.  The  Annecy  autograph  had  to  be  rightly  joined 
with  the  Eoman.  Then  came  the  question  of  omit- 
ting repetitions,  viz.,  the  parts  on  scandal,  on  Scripture, 
and  on  the  Pope.  Then  had  to  be  studied  the  many 
single  sentences  and  words  about  which  any  dilfficulty 
arose.  Such  difficulties  were  not  frequent  concerning 
the  autograph  part,  but  in  the  non-autograph  part 
they  frequently  occurred.  The  original  was  hard  to 
make  out,  the  copy  was  not  of  great  assistance  here, 
the  printed  text  was  all  wrong.  Sometimes  the  consi- 
deration of  one  word  would  occupy  an  hour  or  more 
in  Eome  or  in  England.  But  success  was  at  last 
obtained,  except  in  the  three  instances  mentioned  in 
the  notes,*  and  scarcely  amounting  to  two   lines  in 

*  We  have  forgotten  to  mention  that  we  took  the  responsibility  of 
putting  Fisher  (p.  154)  where  the  Annecy  text  spells  "Fucher;"  and 
(p.  180)  of  translating  fleet  (camre?^e«— ships)  where  the  printed  French 

Translator^ s  Preface.  xix 

all.  Tne  quotations  had  to  be  carefully  verified  and 
the  true  references  given  :  the  original  was  found  to  be 
correct  in  almost  every  instance.  In  fine,  titles  had  to 
be  placed  to  the  three  parts,  and  to  such  articles  and 
chapters  as  had  not  received  their  headings  from  the 
Saint.  We  will  now  indicate  the  points  which  we 
consider  to  deserve  special  notice. 

(i.)  The  General  Introduction  will  be  seen  to  be 
made  up,  in  the  French  text,  of  two  parts.  The  end- 
ing of  the  first  appears  in  the  middle  of  the  united 
parts.  As  the  same  words  form  the  end  of  the  whole 
Introduction  (p.  lo),  we  have  omitted  them  on  p.  4.* 
There  is  a  second  copy  of  that  part  of  the  Introduction 
which  treats  of  scandal,  carefully  corrected  by  the 
Saint.     We  give  it  at  the  end  of  our  Preface. 

(2.)  The  Discours  which  is  called  the  first  in  the 
French  being  repeated  in  the  second  and  third,  we 
have  omitted  it,  greatly  clearing  the  text.  The  Saint 
gives  no  guide  to  the  divisions  here ;  we  have  there- 
fore made  our  own  divisions  and  titles  of  the  first 
four  chapters. 

(3.)  The  Introduction  to  Part  11.  has  a  second 
treatment  in  another  part  of  the  MS.,  but  there  is  no 
practical  difference  between  the  two.  This  Intro- 
duction is  important  as  regulating  the  number  of  Parts, 

text  has  caravanes,  which  is  certainly  wrong.  Our  MS.  copy  has  Car- 
varanie.  The  same  incident  is  related  in  the  Etendard  de  la  Croix  (II.  4) 
as  having  taken  place  in  Visle  Camarane. 

*  The  following  lines,  of  no  substantial  importance,  have  been 
inadvertently  omitted  on  this  p.  4.  "Yon  will  see  in  this  Treatise 
good  reasons — and  which  I  will  prove  good — which  will  make  you 
see  clearly  as  the  day  that  you  are  out  of  the  way  that  must  be  followed 
for  salvation  ;  and  this  not  by  fault  of  your  holy  guide,  but  in  punish- 
ment of  having  left  her." 

XX  Translator  s  Preface. 

and  the  order  of  articles  and  chapters.  Three  Parts,* 
and  three  Parts  only,  are  mentioned,  and  this  division 
is  confirmed  in  the  Introduction  to  the  next  and 
last  Part.  The  eight  articles  of  Part  II.  are  clearly 
indicated  on  p.  86. 

(4.)  Of  the  first  part  of  Article  I.,  on  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, we  have  two  very  similar  recensions.  The  first 
editor,  who  has  been  followed  in  subsequent  French 
editions,  adopted  the  plan  of  giving  first  the  four 
chapters  of  the  one,  afterwards  the  four  chapters  of 
the  other,  with  the  efiect  of  burdening  his  text  and 
confusing  his  readers.  We  have  united  the  chapters 
which  have  the  same  titles,  our  table  of  contents 
showing  the  way  in  which  the  chapters  have  been 
blended.  We  have  made  an  exception  as  to  c.  7 
(the  matter  of  which  is  given  again  in  cc.  5,  8), 
because  the  arguments  are  put  differently  and  from 
a  different  point  of  view.  In  c.  5  the  Saint  gives  the 
heretical  violation  of  Scripture  as  a  consequence  of 
their  belief  in  private  inspiration,  in  the  others  he 
gives  them  absolutely.  In  this  part,  particularly  at 
the  end  of  Discours  xxxiii.,  the  MS.  gives  many  slight 
directions  for  locating  the  different  points  treated. 
Similar  indications  appear  here  and  there  throughout, 
and  we  need  scarcely  say  that  the  Saint's  intentions 
have  been  religiously  observed  by  us. 

(5.)  In  cc.  9,  1 1  of  this  Article  I.  we  have  quota- 

*  "We  have  just  discovered  in  an  obscure  corner  of  the  MS.  a  sentence 
which  belongs  to  this  subject,  p.  87,  and  which  is  important  as  giving 
the  object  of  Part  III.  "  And  because  I  could  not  easily  prove  that  we 
Catholics  have  most  strictly  kept  them  (the  Rules  of  Faith),  without 
making  too  many  interruptions  and  digressions,  I  will  reserve  this 
proof  for  Part  III.,  which  will  also  serve  as  a  very  solid  confirmation 
of  all  this  second  Part." 

Translator's  Preface,  xxi 

tions  from  Montaigne.  The  fact  of  quoting  him  was 
made  an  objection  against  conferring  the  Doctorate, 
on  the  ground  that  Montaigne  was  not  only  a  pro- 
fane but  also  an  irreligious  and  immoral  writer.  The 
objection  is  sufficiently  answered  by  Alibrandi's  refer- 
ence to  the  practice  of  S.  Paul  and  the  Fathers,  but 
there  is  a  much  fuller  defence  than  that,  both  of  the 
Saint  and  of  Montaigne.  It  is  enough  here  to  say  that 
these  passages  are  taken  from  the  grand  and  most 
religious  essay  "  On  Prayer,"  near  the  beginning  of 
which  Montaigne  speaks  as  follows  of  what  he  calls 
his  fantaisies  informes  et  irresolues.  "  And  I  submit 
them  to  the  judgment  of  those  whose  it  is  to  regulate 
not  only  my  actions  and  my  writings  but  my  thoughts 
likewise.  Equally  well  taken  by  me  will  be  their 
condemnation  or  their  approbation,  and  I  hold  as 
impious  and  absurd  anything  which  by  ignorance  or 
inadvertence  may  be  found  contained  in  this  rhapsody 
contrary  to  the  holy  decisions  and  commands  of  the 
Catholic,  Apostolic,  and  Eoman  Church,  in  which  I  die 
and  in  which  I  was  born.  Wherefore,  ever  submitting 
myself  to  the  authority  of  their  censure,  &c." 

(6.)  Immediately  after  Scripture  and  Tradition  we 
place  the  article  on  the  Church.  The  French  editions 
have  here  put  that  on  the  Pope,  probably  on  account, 
originally,  of  a  marginal  note  in  the  MS.  at  the 
beginning  of  that  section:  "this  chapter  to  be  put 
first  for  this  part."  The  same  note  it  probably  was 
which  led  them  to  make  this  article  the  commence- 
ment of  a  Part  III.  It  ought  to  have  been  clear  that 
the  Saint  used  the  word  part  not  for  a  division  of  his 
work  but  in  the  sense  of  subject. 

We  have  said  that  nothing  can  be  more  incorrect 

xxii  Translator's  Preface, 

and  confusing  than  the  order  of  the  French  printed 
texts  in  this  Article  III.  The  first  four  pages  are 
right,  though  under  a  wrong  title,  but  on  p.  153  we 
come  to  a  broken  sentence :  ^  "  every  proposition  which 
stands  this  test  ..."  Leonard  quickly  finished  it 
off  with  "  is  good,"  and  then  goes  off  in  the  same 
DiscouTs  to  the  subject  of  Councils.  We  have  been 
fortunate  enough  to  find  the  continuation  of  the  sen- 
tence and  chapter  in  the  Annecy  autograph,  which 
we  now  begin  to  use  for  the  first  time.  " .  .  .1 
accept  as  most  faithful  and  sound."  It  is  not  necessary 
to  make  further  mention  of  the  errors  of  the  French 
editions  down  to  our  Chapter  IV.  Our  Chapter  11. 
begins  with  another  section  from  the  Annecy  MS. 
We  have  brought  back  the  chapter  On  the  unity  of  the 
Church  in  headship  to  its  proper  place  here  (c.  3), 
and  relegated  the  parts  on  Fathers,  and  Councils,  and 
the  Pope,  to  their  proper  places  elsewhere.  With 
regard  to  the  exquisite  passage  on  the  analogy  be- 
tween the  Creed  and  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  whilst  it 
certainly  does  not  come  between  the  Fathers  and  the 
Church  where  Leonard  has  thrust  it  (Discours  XLVI.), 
we  cannot  be  certain  that  it  belongs  strictly  to  Article 
VIIL  (c.  2),  where  we  have  placed  it,  though  it  treats  of 
the  same  subject.     It  exactly  occupies  sheet  3  i  of  the 

*  We  find  in  a  detached  note  elsewhere  an  amplification  of  the 
sentence  immediately  preceding  this.  "  As  those  who  look  at  the  neck 
of  a  dove  see  it  change  into  as  many  various  colours  as  they  make 
changes  of  their  point  of  view  and  their  distance,  so  those  who  observe 
the  Holy  Scripture,  through  which,  as  through  a  neck,  we  receive 
heavenly  nourishment,  seem  to  themselves  to  see  there  all  sorts  of 
opinions  according  to  the  diversity  of  their  passions.  Is  it  not  a 
marvellous  thing  to  see  how  many  kinds  of  heresies  there  have  been  up 
to  now,  the  source  of  which  their  authors  all  confidently  professed  to 
show  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  " 

Translator's  Preface,  xxiii 

Eoman  autograph,  and  we  are  inclined  to  think  that 
it  was  a  sheet  sent  round  separately.  It  may  have 
been  an  abstract  of  his  little  printed  work,  Considera- 
tions  on  the  Creed,  and  perhaps  may  have  helped  to 
produce  the  good  effect  referred  to  in  a  letter  to  Favre 
(5),  written  about  the  time  when  it  would  be  going 
about :  "  The  ministers  have  confessed  that  we  drew 
good  conclusions  from  the  Holy  Scriptures  about  the 
mystery  of  the  Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Altar." 

(7.)  Our  text  now  runs  on  in  substantial  agreement 
with  the  French  until  the  end  of  the  article  on  the 
Church,  except  that  we  have  transferred  part  of  the 
section  on  Miracles  to  its  proper  place  as  Article  VIL, 
and  omitted  from  cc.  13,  14  what  is  already  given  in 
Part  I. 

The  verbal  corrections,  however,  required  in  this 
article  are  very  numerous.  After  c.  3  the  MS.  ceases 
for  a  time  to  be  autograph,  and  the  German  character 
has  puzzled  our  copyist  and  much  more  the  French 
editor.     Some  examples  may  be  of  interest. 

"  Si  fecond  "  becomes  "  et  tailleurs  "  in  the  copy  •, 
Leonard  removing  the  difficulty  by  substituting  a  safe 
but  irrelevant  text.  "Frederick  Staphyl"  is  in  the  copy 
"Sedenegue  Stapsit,"  afterwards  "Seneque  Staphul" 
or  "  Staphu,"  Blaise  supplying  the  note — "  unknown 
work  of  an  unknown  author."  Viv^s  gives  "  Tilmann, 
Heshisme  et  Oraste ; "  he  also  has  "  Yallenger "  for 
"  Bullinger,"  and  "  Tesanzaiis  "  for  "  Jehan  Hus  ; " 
both  editors  have  "Tanzuelins"  instead  of  "Zuingliens." 
There  is  some  excuse  for  the  word  "  vermeriques," 
which  we  have  translated  "fanatic"  (p.  174);  it  turns 
out  to  be  "  suermericos,"  a  favourite  word  with  Coch- 
Iseus,  probably  from  schwdrmer.     "Diego  of  Alcala" 

XXIV  Translator's  Preface, 

becomes  "Diogenes  of  Archada,"  "Judas"  is  put  for 
"  Donatus  ;  "  "  Heshushius,"  or  "  Zosime,"  or  "  Zuingle," 
for  "  Ochin."  "  Treves,"  ''  patriarche,"  "  ou  moyne," 
become  respectively  "  Thebes,"  "  paterneche,"  "  ^ 
moins."  "  Cochin  "  is  turned  into  '*  Virne."  *  Chid- 
abbe "  escapes  perversion  because  it  is  in  autograph 
elsewhere,  but  Blaise,  forgetting  that  the  African  S. 
Augustine  is  speaking,  sagely  informs  us  that  "this 
mountain  is  in  the  environs  of  Thonon."  The  note 
on  p.  191  represents  a  not  unimportant  restoration  of 
the  text.  The  copy  had  sapines,  the  printed  text 
hesoins;  the  context  easily  guided  one  to  the  right 
word,  psaulmes. 

In  Article  IV.  we  return  to  the  Saint's  own  clear 
hand  in  the  MS.  and  so  to  greater  verbal  correctness. 
Most  of  this  invaluable  section  is  supplied  by  the 
Annecy  MS. 

(9.)  Article  VI.,  on  the  Pope,  has  been  fairly  well 
edited  from  the  Koman  MS.  We  are  able  to  supply 
from  the  Annecy  autograph  a  large  and  most  impor- 
tant addition  on  the  qualities  of  an  ex  cathedrd 
judgment  (pp.  299-311), 

Of  this  Article  we  find  two  recensions  in  the  Roman 
text,  one  in  autograph,  and  the  other,  which  lacks  the 
first  two  chapters,  not.  The  autograph  is  much  superior 
on  the  whole,  but  the  order  of  the  other  recension  is 
better,  and  in  this  we  have  followed  it.  From  it  also 
we  have  introduced  into  our  translation  the  important 

*  One  of  Blaise's  attacks  on  the  Saint's  "criticism"  turns  on  this 
word.  The  statement  here  attributed  to  the  Bishop  of  Virne  is  put 
down,  in  the  Standard  of  the  Cross,  to  the  Bishop  of  Cecine.  This  latter 
word  only  requires  the  change  of  the  first  e  into  0  to  make  it  an 
Italianized  Cochin. 

Translator's  Preface,  xxv 

passage  (pp.  2^6-7)  :  "  And  if  the  wills,  &c."  to  end 
of  paragraph.  On  the  same  p.  276  occurs  the  pregnant 
statement  that  the  headship  of  Peter  is  the  form  of 
Apostolic  unity,  that  is,  that  the  Apostles  formed  one 
body  precisely  by  virtue  of  their  union  with  Peter. 
This  word  forme  was  correctly  printed  in  Blaise's 
edition  of  this  part  in  1833,  but  Viv^s  and  Migne  have 
altered  it  into  fermeU.  We  have  paid  particular  atten- 
tion to  the  important  list  of  Papal  titles  (pp.  291-2). 
Blaise  had  certainly  a  right  to  complain  of  the  mistakes 
in  the  references  here,  but  they  are  the  fault  of  the 
first  editor,  not  of  the  author,  and  on  careful  examina- 
tion we  find  that  of  the  fifty-three  titles  all  are  correct 
except  perhaps  two ;  of  which  one  cannot  be  traced, 
another  attributes  to  Anacletus  a  letter  which  belongs 
to  Siricius.  Almost  the  same  list  is  given  in  the  first 
chapter  of  the  Fabrian  code.  Article  V. 

We  have  now  said  what  we  think  necessary  as  to 
the  substance  of  this  work  and  as  to  our  editing.  As  to 
its  manner  we  only  repeat  that  to  many  this  volume 
will  be  a  new  revelation  of  the  Saint.  The  same 
calm  sanctity,  the  same  heavenly  wisdom,  the  same 
charisma  of  sweetness,  pervade  all  his  works,  but  as 
a  controversialist,  as  a  champion  of  the  Church,  he 
here  puts  on  that  martial  bearing,  takes  up  those 
mighty  weapons,  proper  to  inspire  confidence  into 
his  comrades  and  to  make  his  enemies  quail  before 

It  is  remarkable  that  after  a  sleep  of  ten  genera- 
tions the  Saint  should  appear  first  to  preach  again  his 
true  words  in  a  country  so  similar  to  that  for  which 
they  were  first  preached  and  providentially  written. 
And  though  the  heresy  is  more  inveterate,  yet  it  13 

XXVI  Translator  s  Preface, 

therefore  the  more  excusable,  and  he  comes,  as  he  did 
not  come  to  the  Chablais,  first  recommended  by  his 
moral  and  devotional  teaching.  It  is  providential, 
too,  that  he  should  wait  so  long,  that  he  should 
slumber  during  the  fierce  Galilean  and  Jansenist 
struggles  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries, 
that  his  words  on  these  controverted  matters  should 
up  to  now  be  so  doubtful  that  neither  friend  nor  foe 
could  safely  dare  to  quote  them.  He  appears  like  an 
ancient  record,  or  rather  like  an  ancient  Prophet,  to 
witness  to  the  plain  and  simple  belief  of  the  Church 
in  the  days  before  these  storms  arose ;  to  prove  to 
us  that  the  Church's  exclusive  right  to  teach,  the 
necessity  of  having  Mission  from  her,  the  evilness  of 
heresy,  the  supremacy  and  infallibility  of  the  Pope 
are  not  inventions,  not  doctrines  of  to-day  or  yester- 
day, but  the  perpetual  and  necessary  truths  of  Catholic 
faith.  And  this  is  the  particular  excellence  of  S. 
Prancis :  he  defends  the  Church  from  accusations  of 
falseness,  but  indirectly  he  still  more  fully  clears  her 
doctrines  of  the  charge  of  novelty.*  It  might  well 
be  thought  that  the  Controversy  of  the  sixteenth 
century  would  be  somewhat  out  of  date  now.  But 
this  is  not  true  of  the  present  work,  not  only  on 
account  of  the  intrinsic  efficacy  of  its  argument  and 
language,  not  only  on  account  of  the  sort  of  prophetic 
insight  by  which  he  reaches  in  advance  of  his  time 
and  answers  objections  that  had  scarcely  yet  arisen, 
but  chiefly  because  there  lies  behind  the  strength  of 
his  reasons  the  weight  of  his  authority  as  a  witness, 

*  We  have  drawn  this  out  at  some  length  in  our  pamphlet  en- 
titled "  Four  Essays  on  the  Life  and  Writings  of  S.  Francis  De  Sales," 
pp.  98-114. 

Translator  s  Preface,  xxvii 

as  a  Doctor,  we  had  almost  said,  in  these  days  of  rapid 
movement,  as  a  Father  of  the  Church.  And  there  is 
no  Doctor  who  better  represents  the  true  Catholic 
supernatural  spirit,  far  removed  from  rationalism  on 
the  one  hand,  from  superstition  and  fanaticism  on  the 
other.  Instead  of  being  an  extremist,  as  Gallicans 
would  nickname  true  believers,  he  was  accused,  in  his 
own  time,  of  lessening  the  fulness  of  Catholic  doctrine. 
He  says  (p.  2) :  "  It  will  be  seen  that  I  deny  a 
thousand  impieties  attributed  to  Catholics :  this  is  not 
in  order  to  escape  from  the  difficulty,  as  some  have 
said,  but  to  follow  the  holy  intention  of  the  Church." 
He  preaches  the  full  but  simple  Catholic  truth,  and 
his  teaching  was  at  last  accepted  as  such  by  the 
72,000  heretics  of  the  Chablais.  They  had  rejected 
Catholic  doctrine  when  misunderstood,  but  when  they 
understood  what  it  was  they  hesitated  indeed,  from 
worldly  motives,  as  to  accepting  it  at  all,  but  then 
they  took  it  with  simplicity  as  a  whole,  making  no 
hesitation  as  to  a  part,  or  on  the  ground  of  inconsis- 
tency of  part  with  part.  Modern  heretics  would  make 
such  a  distinction,  there  are  even  within  the  Church 
those  who  try  to  do  so.  For  such  we  add,  by  way 
of  conclusion  to  our  Preface  and  of  introduction  to  the 
Saint's  argument,  the  testimony  of  an  unsuspected 
witness  of  his  own  age : 

"  What  seems  to  me,"  says  Montaigne,  in  the  Essay 
"  On  Custom,"  "  to  bring  so  much  disorder  into  our 
consciences  in  these  troubles  which  we  are  in  as  to 
religious  matters  is  this  dispensation  which  Catholics 
make  in  their  belief.  They  fancy  they  act  as  moderate 
and  enlightened  men  when  they  grant  their  adversaries 
some  article  which  is  in   debate.     But  besides  that 

xxviii  Translator^ s  Preface, 

they  do  not  see  what  an  advantage  it  is  to  the  man 
who  attacks  you  to  begin  to  yield  to  him,  and  to  draw 
back  yourself,  and  how  this  encourages  him  to  pursue 
his  advantage, — those  articles  which  they  choose  as 
the  lightest  are  sometimes  very  important.  We  must 
entirely  submit  to  the  authority  of  our  ecclesiastical 
tribunal  or  entirely  dispense  ourselves  from  it;  it  is 
not  for  us  to  determine  the  amount  of  obedience  we 
owe  to  it.  Besides, — and  I  can  say  it  as  having  tried 
it,  because  I  formerly  used  this  liberty  of  choosing 
for  myself  and  of  personal  selection,  holding  in  light 
esteem  certain  points  of  observance  belonging  to  our 
Church,  which  appear  on  the  face  of  them  somewhat 
idle  or  strange ; — when  I  came  to  discuss  them  with 
learned  men  I  have  found  that  these  things  have  a 
strong  and  very  solid  base,  and  that  it  is  only  folly 
and  ignorance  which  make  us  receive  them  with  less 
reverence  than  the  rest"* 


Feait  of  S.  Francis  de  Sales, 
2gth  January  1886. 

*  ["We  append  here  the  Saint's  second  treatment  of  the  subject  of 
scandal,  see.  p.  5.]  There  is  nothing  of  which  the  Holy  Scripture  gives 
more  warning,  history  mofe  testimony,  our  age  more  experience,  than 
of  the  facility  with  which  man  is  scandalized.  It  is  so  great  that  there 
is  nothing,  however  good  it  may  be,  from  which  he  does  not  draw  some 
occasion  of  his  ruin  ;  being  unhappy  indeed  in  this  that  having  every- 
where opportunities  of  drawing  profit  he  turns  and  takes  them  all  to 
his  own  disadvantage  and  misery.  We  may  put  so  exactly  into  prac- 
tice what  Plutarch  teaches, — to  draw  benefit  even  from  our  enemy — 
that  even  sin,  our  capital  enemy  and  the  sovereign  evil  of  the  world, 
can  bring  us  to  the  knowledge  of  self,  to  humility  and  contrition. 
And  a  good  man's  fall  makes  him  afterwards  walk  straighter  and 
more  circumspectly.  So  true  is  the  word  of  S.  Paul  :  We  Jcnoio  that  all 
things  work  together  unto  good  to  them  that  love  God  (Rom.  viii.  28). 

Not  indeed  that  sin  within  us  helps  us,  or  when  no  longer  in  us  can 

Translator's  Preface,  xxix 

work  us  any  good,  for  sin  is  bad  in  every  sense,  but  from  it  can  be 
derived  occasions  of  great  good  which  it  would  never  of  itself  produce, 
imitating  the  bees  which  went  and  made  honey  within  the  putrid 
carcase  of  the  fierce  lion  which  Samson  had  slain.  Is  it  not  then  a 
strange  thing  that  being  able  to  profit  by  all  things,  however  bad  they 
may  be,  we  should  turn  all  to  our  harm  ?  If  indeed  we  only  took  evil 
from  what  is  evil  it  would  not  be  a  great  wonder,  for  that  is  what 
first  offers ;  if  we  drew  evil  from  indifferent  and  harmless  things 
nature  would  not  be  so  much  outraged,  for  these  are  arms  which  all 
hands  may  use  : — though  our  baseness  would  still  be  great  in  that  hav- 
ing it  in  our  power  to  change  everything  into  good  by  so  easy  and 
cheap  an  alchemy,  for  which  one  single  spark  of  charity  suffices,  we 
were  of  so  ill  a  disposition  as  to  remain  in  our  misery  and  procure  our 
own  hurt.  But  it  is  a  wonderful  thing,  and  passing  all  wonder,  that 
in  good,  profitable,  holy,  divine  things,  in  God  himself,  the  malice  of 
men  finds  matter  to  occupy  itself  with,  to  feed  and  to  thrive  upon ; 
that  in  a  subject  of  infinite  beauty  it  finds  things  to  blame  ;  in  this 
illimitable  sea  of  all  goodness  it  finds  evil,  and  in  the  sovereign 
felicity  the  occasion  of  its  misery. 

The  great  Simeon  predicted  of  Our  Lord,  having  him  in  his  arms 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  in  his  soul,  that  the  child  would  be  the  ruin  of 
many  and  a  sign  to  be  contradicted.  Almost  the  same  had  Isaias  said 
long  before  when  he  called  Our  Lord  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  of 
scandal,  according  to  the  interpretation  of  S.  Paul.  Is  there  not  here 
reason  for  lamenting  the  misery  of  man  who  stumbles  and  falls  over 
the  stone  which  had  been  placed  for  his  firm  support,  who  founds  his 
perdition  on  the  stone  of  salvation  ?  .  .  .  But  the  necessity  there  is 
in  this  world  that  scandals  should  come  must  not  serve  as  an  excuse 
to  him  who  by  his  bad  life  gives  it,  nor  to  him  who  receives  it  from 
the  hand  of  the  scandalizer,  nor  to  him  who  of  his  own  malice  goes 
seeking  and  procuring  it  for  himself.  For  as  to  those  who  give  it, 
they  have  no  other  necessity  than  what  lies  in  the  design  and  resolu- 
tion which  they  have  themselves  made  of  living  wickedly  and  viciously. 
They  could  if  they  liked,  by  the  grace  of  God,  avoid  infecting  and 
poisoning  the  world  with  the  noisome  exhalations  of  their  sins,  and 
be  a  good  odour  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  world,  however,  is  so  filled  with 
sinners  that,  although  many  amend  and  are  put  back  into  grace,  there 
always  remains  an  infinite  number  who  give  testimony  that  scandal 
must  needs  come.     Still,  woe  to  him  by  ivhom  scandal  cometh. 

And  as  to  those  who  forge  scandals  for  themselves,  tickling  them- 
selves to  make  themselves  laugh  in  their  iniquities,  who,  like  their 
forerunner,  Esau,  at  the  slightest  difiiculty  to  their  understanding  in 
matters  of  faith,  or  to  their  will  in  the  holy  commandments,  persuade 

XXX  Translator  s  Preface, 

themselves  that  they  will  die  if  they  do  not  alienate  the  portion  which 
they  have  in  the  Church, — since  they  will  have  malediction  and  seek 
it,  no  wonder  if  they  are  accursed.  Both  the  one  and  the  other,  the 
giver  and  the  taker  of  scandal,  are  very  wicked,  but  he  who  takes  it 
without  having  it  given  to  him  is  as  much  more  cruel  than  the  man 
who  gives  it  as  to  destroy  oneself  is  a  more  unnatural  crime  than  to 
kill  another. 

In  fine,  he  who  takes  the  scandal  which  is  given,  that  is,  who  has 
some  occasion  of  scandalizing  himself  and  does  so,  can  have  no  other 
excuse  than  Eve  had  with  regard  to  the  serpent,  and  Adam  with  regard 
to  Eve,  which  Our  God  found  unacceptable.  And  all  of  them,  the 
scandalizer,  the  scandalized,  and  the  taker  of  scandal,  are  inexcusable  and 
guilty,  but  unequally.  For  the  scandalized  man  has  more  infirmity,  the 
scandalizer  more  malice,  and  the  taker  of  scandal  goes  to  the  extreme 
of  malice.  The  first  is  scandalized,  the  second  is  scandalous,  the  third 
scandalous  and  scandalized  together.  The  first  is  wanting  in  firmness, 
the  second  in  kindness  towards  others,  the  third  in  kindness  towards 
himself.  .  .  . 

How  greatly  this  third  form  of  scandal  has  been  in  use  up  to  this 
present  the  universal  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  history  shows  us 
in  a  thousand  places.  We  shall  scarcely  find  as  many  instances  of  all 
the  other  vices  as  we  shall  find  of  this  alone.  Scandal,  whether 
passive  or  taken,  appears  so  thickly  in  the  Scriptures  that  there  is 
scarcely  a  chapter  in  which  its  marks  are  not  seen.  It  would  be  point- 
ing out  daylight  at  high  noon  to  take  much  pains  to  produce  the 
passages.  These  will  serve  for  all.  Did  not  those  of  Capharnaum 
scandalize  themselves  in  good  earnest  over  Our  Lord's  words,  as  S. 
John  relates  (vi.),  saying  :  This  is  a  hard  saying,  and  who  can  hear  it? 
And  on  what  an  occasion  !  Because  Our  Lord  is  so  good  as  to  desire 
to  nourish  them  with  his  flesh,  because  he  says  words  of  eternal  life, 
do  they  turn  against  him.  And  over  what  do  those  labourers  scandalize 
themselves — those  (Matt,  xx.)  who  murmured  because  the  lord  of  the 
vineyard  gave  to  the  last  comers  as  to  the  first — save  over  kindness 
and  liberality  and  benefits  ?  "What !  says  the  good  lord,  is  thy  eye  evU 
because  I  am  good  ?  Who  sees  not,  in  that  holy  banquet  and  supper 
which  was  given  to  Our  Lord  at  Bethany  (John  xii.),  how  Judas 
grows  indignant  and  murmurs  when  he  sees  the  honour  which  devout 
Magdalen  does  to  her  Saviour — how  the  sweetness  of  the  odour  of  that 
poured  out  ointment  off"ends  the  smell  of  that  hideous  reptile  ?  Al- 
ready then  did  they  stumble  over  that  holy  stone.  But  since  then — 
who  could  recount  all  that  history  tells  us  of  the  same  ?  All  those 
who  have  abandoned  the  true  Church,  under  what  pretext  soever, 
have  made  themselves  [his  imitators].  .  .  . 


Since  the  appearance  of  the  first  edition  of  this 
translation  the  French  complete  and  definitive  text 
of  the  original  has  been  prepared  and  published, 
forming  the  first  volume  of  the  "  GEuvres  de  Saint 
Franpois  de  Sales."  In  the  researches  necessary  for 
this  purpose  various  discoveries  were  made  in  addition 
to  those  which  had  already  been  utilised  for  the  first 
English  edition :  a  certain  amount  of  new  matter 
was  found;  the  exact  intention  of  the  Author  as  to 
the  order  of  his  subjects  became  more  evident;  a 
number  of  verbal  corrections  were  able  to  be  effected. 
These  discoveries  had  to  be  taken  into  account 
when  it  became  necessary  to  make  a  second  edition 
of  the  translation.  The  new  material,  which  con- 
cerns the  important  subject  of  miracles  and  of  the 
anology  of  faith  with  reason,  was  of  course  introduced 
as  it  stood,  and  will  be  found  on  pages  317  to  330 
of  the  present  volume.  With  regard  to  the  order  of 
the  divisions,  as  the  only  serious  difference  in  that 
respect  between  the  MS.  and  on  previous  editions 
was  the  attachment  of  the  section  on  the  "  Marks  of 
the  Church  "  to  the  first  part  entitled  "  Mission  "  in 
our  version,  instead  of  to  the  second,  "  The  Eule  of 
Faith,"  it  did  not  seem  necessary  to  make  a  change. 
The  verbal  corrections  regard  principally  the  greater 

xxxii  Note  to  the  Second  Edition, 

perfection  of  the  French  style,  and  are  as  a  rule 
unimportant  in  a  translation.  They  have  therefore 
been  adopted  only  on  the  few  occasions  when  they 
were  really  important  for  the  sense.  The  references 
to  authors  have  been  revised  and  corrected,  but  they 
are  not  given  with  the  same  fulness  as  in  the  French 
text.  To  this  latter,  it  may  be  said  in  passing,  are 
added  an  historical  introduction  to  the  work,  and  a 
list  of  writers  posterior  to  the  thirteenth  century 
cited  by  the  saintly  Author,  which  do  not  figure  in 
the  present  version. 


Feasl  of  our  Holy  Father 
St.  Benedict,  1899. 


[The  Roman  numerals  refer  to  the  French  '  *  jDzscowrs."] 


Translator's  Preface  to  the  First  Edition       .       .       v 

Author's  General  Introduction i 

Note  to  the  Second  Edition xxxi 

Part  L 


I. — The  lack  of  mission  in  the  ministers  of  the  new  pre- 
tended church  leaves  both  them  and  their  fol- 
lowers without  excuse.     [II.]  .         .        .        .II 
II. — That  the  pretended  reformers  had  no  mediate  mission 

either  from  the  people  or  the  Bishops.     [III.,  IV.]        13 
III. — The  pretended  reformers  had  no  immediate  or  extra- 
ordinary mission  from  God.     [V.]  .        .        .        .       iS 
I  v. — An  answer  to  the  two  objections  which  are  made  by 
the  supporters  of  the  theory  of  immediate  mission. 

[VI.] 26 

V. — That  the  invisible  church  from  which  the  innovators 
pretend  to  derive  their  mission  is  a  figment,  and 
that  the  true  Church  of  Christ  is  visible.     [VII.]  .      32 
VI. — Answer  to  the  objections  made  against  the  visibility 

of  the  Church.     [VIII.] 37 

VII. — That  in  the  Church  there  are  good  and  bad,  predesti- 
nate and  reprobate.     [IX.] 41 

VI il. — Answer  to  the  objections  of  those  who  would  have 
the  Church  to  consist  of  the  predestinate  alone. 

[X.] 46 

III.  c 

xxxiv  Contents. 


IX.— That  the  Church  cannot  perish.     [XI.]       ...       54 
X. — The  counter- arguments  of  our  adversaries,  and  the 

answers  thereto.     [XII.] Oo 

XL— That  the  Church  has  never  been  dispersed  nor  hidden. 

[XIII.] 63 

XII.— The  Church  cannot  err.    [XIV.]         ....      68 
XIII.— The  ministers  have  violated  the  authority  of   the 

Church.     [XV.] 74 

Part  H. 


Introduction S2 


Holy  Scripture  first  Kule  of  Faith.— That  the  pke- 
TENDED  Reformers  have  violated  Holy  Scripture, 
THE  First  Rule  of  our  Faith. 


1. — The    Scripture  is  a  tiue   rule  of    Christian    faith. 

[XVI.,  part  of  XXL] 87 

II. — How  jealous  we  should  be  of  its  integrity.     [XVII., 

part  of  XXL] 89 

HI. — What  are  the  sacred   books  of  the  Word  of  God. 

[XVIIL,  part  of  XXIL] 91 

IV. — First  violation  of  the  Holy  Scripture  made  by  the 

reformers :  by  cutting  off  some  of  its  parts.  [XIX.]  96 
V. — Second  violation  of  the  Scriptures  :  by  the  rule  which 

these  reformers  bring  forward  to  distinguish  the 

sacred  books  from  the  others  :  and  of  some  smaller 

parts  they  cut  off  from  them  according  to  this  rule. 

[Part  of  XX.] 103 

VI. — Answer  to  an  objection.  [Part  of  XXIL,  part  of  XX.]  1 10 
VII. — How  greatly  the  reformers  have  violated  the  integrity 

of  the  Scriptures.     [Part  of  XXIIL]       .        .        .114 

Contents,  xxxv 


VIII. — How  the  majesty  of  the  Scriptures  has  been  violated 
in  the  interpretations  and  versions  of  the  heretics. 

[XXIV.,  part  of  XXIIL] 119 

IX. — Of  the  profanations  contained  in  the  versions  made 

into  the  vulgar  tongue.    [XXV.]     .        .        .        .122 
X.— Of  the  profanation  of  the  Scriptures  through  the 
facility  they  pretend  there  is  in  understanding 

Scripture.    [Part  of  XXVI.] 129 

XI.— On  the  profanation  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  versified 
psalms  used  by  the  pretended  reformers.     [Part  of 

XXVL,  part  of  XXIIL] 133 

XII. — Answer  to  objections,  and  conclusion  of  this  first 

article.    [XXVII.] 137 


That  the  Church  of  the  Pretendees  has  violated  the 
Apostolic  Traditions,  the  Second  Rule  of  our  Faith. 


I. — What  is  understood  by  Apostolic  traditions.  [XXVIIL]    142 
II. — That  there  are  Apostolic  traditions  in  the  Church. 

[XXIX] 146 

The  Church  :  Third  Rule  of  Faith.    How  the  Ministers 


Third  Rule  of  our  Faith. 


I. — That  we  need  some  other  rule  besides  the  "Word  of 

God.  [Part  of  XLIV. ;  Annecy  autograph.]  .  149 
XL — That  the  Church  is  an  infallible  guide  for  our  faith. 
That  the  true  Church  is  visible.  Definition  of  the 
Church.  [Annecy  autograph;  part  of  XLVIL]  .  157 
III. — The  Catholic  Church  is  one.  Mark  the  first.  It  is 
tinder  one  visible  head,  that  of  the  protestants  is 
not.     [Part  of  XLVIII.,  XXXV.]  .        .        .        .161 

xxxvi  Cojiteitts, 

CBAr.  fAOB 

IV. — Unity  of  the  Church  [continued).     Of  the  unity  of  the 

Church  in  doctrine  and  belief.     The  true  Church 

must  be  one  in  its  doctrine.    The  Catholic  Church 

is  united  in  belief,  the  so-called  reformed  church 

is  not.     [XLIX.] 170 

V. — Of  the  sanctity  of  the  Church  :  second  mark.    [L.]     .     176 
VI.  —Second  mark  {continued).     The  true  Church  ought  to 

be  resplendent  in  miracles.     [LIII.]        .        .        -177 
VII. — Sanctity  of  the  Church  [continued).     The   Catholic 
Church   is  accompanied  with  miracles,  the  pre- 
tended is  not.     [LIV.] 180 

VIII. — Sanctity  of  the  Church  {continued).  The  spirit  of 
prophecy  ought  to  be  in  the  true  Church.  The 
Catholic  Church  has  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  the 

pretended  has  it  not.     [LV.] 188 

IX. — Sanctity  of  the  Church  {continued).     The  true  Church 
must  practice  the  perfection  of  the  Christian  life. 

[LVL] 190 

X. — Sanctity  of  the  Church  {continued).  The  perfection 
of  the  evangelic  life  is  practised  in  our  Church ; 
in  the  pretended  it  is  despised  and  given  up. 

[LVII.] 199 

XI.— Of  the  universality  or  catholicity  of  the  Church: 

third  mark.     [LVIII.] 203 

XIL — Catholicity  of  the   Church   {conti7iued).      The  true 

Church  must  be  ancient.     The  Catholic  Church  is 

most  ancient,  the  pretended  quite  new.     [LIX.]    .     205 

XIII.— Catholicity  of    the  Church  {continued).     The  true 

Church  must  be  perpetual.    Ours  is  perpetual,  the 

pretended  is  not.     [LX.] 208 

XIV.— Catholicity  of  the  Church  {continued).  The  true 
Church  ought  to  be  universal  in  place  and  per- 
sons.    The  Catholic  Church  is  thus  universal,  the 

pretended  is  not.     [LXI,] 210 

XV.— Catholicity  of  the  Church  {continued).      The  true 
Church  must  be  fruitful.     The  Catholic  Church  is 
fruitful,  the  pretended  barren.     [LXIIL]       .        .213 
XVI.— That  the  Church  is  Apostolic :  fourth  mark.    [LXI  V.]    216 

Contents.  xxxvii 


That  the  Ministeks  have  Violated  the  Authority  of 
Councils,  the  Fourth  Rule  of  our  Faith. 


I.  —Of  the  qualities  of  a  true  Council.     [Annecy  autog.]    .     217 
II. — How  holy  and  sacred  is  the  authority  of  universal 

Councils.     [Ann.] 223 

III. — How  the  ministers  have  despised  and  violated  the 
authority  of  Councils.  [Ann.,  part  of  XLIV.  ; 
XLV.] 227 


That  the  Ministers  have  Violated  the  Authority  of 
the  Ancient  Fathers  of  the  Church,  Fifth  Rule  of 
our  Faith. 


I. — The  authority  of  the  ancient   Fathers  is   venerable. 

[Part  of  XL VI.] 234 


The  Authority  of  the  Pope,   the  Sixth  Rule  of  our 



I. — First  and  second  proofs.  Of  the  first  promise  made 
to  S.  Peter :  Upon  this  rock  I  ivill  build  my 
Church.     [XXX.] 237 

II. — Resolution  of  a  difficulty.     [XXXI.]   ....     244 

III. — Third  proof.  Of  the  second  promise  made  to  S. 
Peter  :  And  I  ivill  give  thee  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.     [XXXII.] 249 

IV. — Fourth  proof.    Of  the  third  promise  made  to  S.  Peter  : 

I  have  prayed  for  thee,  k,Q.     [XXXIV.]         .        .     257 
V. — Fifth  proof.     The  fulfilment  of  these  promises  :  Feed 

my  sheep.     [XXXIII.] 259 

VI. — Sixth  proof.  From  the  order  in  which  the  Evange- 
lists name  the  Apostles.     [XLI.]    ....     265 

xxxviii  Contents. 


VII. — Seventh  proof.       Of  some  other  marks  which  are 
scattered  throughout  the  Scriptures  of  the  primacy 

of  S.  Peter.     [XLII.] 269 

VIIL— Testimonies  of  the  Church  to  this  fact.     [XLIII.]     .    273 
IX, — That  S.  Peter  has  had  successors  in  the  vicar-general- 
ship of  Our  Lord.     The   conditions  required   for 
succeeiUng  him.     [XXXVI. ]  ....     276 

X. — That  the  Bisliop  of  Rome  is  true  successor  of  S.  Peter 

and  head  of  the  militant  Church.     [XXXVII.]     .     280 
XI. — Short  description  of  the  life  of  S.  Peter,  and  of  the 

institution  of  his  first  successors.    [XXXVIII.]    .     285 
XII. — Confirmation  of  all  the  above  by  the  titles  Avhich 

antiquity  has  given  to  the  Pope.    [XXXIX.]         .    290 
XIII. — In  how  great  esteem  the  authority  of  tlie  Pope  ought 

to  be  held.     [XL. ;  Annecy  autograph]  .        .        .     295 
XIV. — How  the  ministers    have  violated    this    authority. 

[Ann. ;  part  of  XLVII.]   .        .        .        .  .305 

Miracles  :  The  Seventh  Rule  of  Faith. 

I. —How  important  miracles  are  for  confirming  our  faith. 

[LL  ;  part  of  LIL] 312 

I[. How  greatly  the  ministers  have  violated  the  faith  due 

to  the  testimony  of  miracles.     [Part  of  LIL  ;  ncAv 
Annecy  autograph.] 317 

Harmony  of  Faith  and  Reason  :  Eighth  Rule  of  Faith. 


L — In  what  sense  reason  and  experience  are  a  rule  of 

right  believing.     [New  Annecy  autograph.]  .        .     326 

II.— That  the  teaching  of  the  pretended  reformers  contra- 
dicts reason.     [LXV.  ;  new  Annecy  autograph.]    .     329 

III._That  the  analogy  of  the  faith  cannot  serve  as  a 
rule  to  the  ministers  to  establish  their  doctrine. 
[LXVL  ;  part  of  XLVL]         ...        ^        .     333 

IV._Conclusion  of  the  whole  of  this  second  part  by  a 
short  enumeration  of  many  excellences  which  are 
in  the  Catholic  doctrine  as  compared  with  the 
opinion  of  the  heretics  of  our  age.     [LXVIL]        .    341 

Contents^  xxxix 



Introduction.    [LXVIIL]    ....,,.    345 



I. — Of  the  name  of  Sacrament.     [LXIX.].        ,        .        .  349 

II. — Of  the  form  of  the  Sacraments.     [LXX.]     .        .        .  350 
III. — Of  the  intention  required  in  the  ration  of  the 

Sacraments.    [LXXI.]    ...,,,  357 



Introduction.    [LXXIL] •       •    363 

I.— Of  the  name  of  Purgatory.     [LXXIIL]       .        .        .365 
II. — Of  those  who  have  denied  Purgatory,  and  of  the 

means  of  proving  it.     [LXXIV.]     ....     366 
III. — Of  some  passages  of  the  Scripture  in  which  mention 
is  made  of  purgation  after  this  life,   and  of  a 
time  and  a  place  for  it.     [Part  of  LXXV.]    .         .     369 
IV. — Of  another  passage  out  of  the  New  Testament  to  this 

effect.     [Part  of  LXXV.] 372 

V. — Of  some  other  passages  by  which  prayer,  alms-deeds, 
and  holy  actions  for  the  departed  are  authorised. 

[LXXVL] 376 

VI. — Of  certain  other  i)laces  of  Scripture  by  which  we 
prove  that  some  sins  can  be  pardoned  in  the  other 

world.     [LXXVIL] 382 

VII. — Of  some  other  places  fiom  which,  by  various  con- 
sequences, is  deduced  the  truth  of  Purgatory 

xl  Contents, 


VIII. — Of  the  Councils  which  ha^-e  received  Purgatory  as  an 

article  of  faith.    [LXXIX.] 388 

IX. — Of  the  testimony  of  the  ancient  Fathers  to  the  truth 

ofPurgator}^     [Part  of  LXXX.]     .        .        .        .390 
X, — Of  two  principal  reasons,  and  of  the  testimonies  of 

outsiders  in  favour  of  Purgatory.    [Part  of  LXXX.]    392 


Gentlemen,  having  prosecuted  for  some  space  of  time 
the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God  in  your  town, 
without  obtaining  a  hearing  from  your  people  save 
rarely,  casually,  and  stealthily, — wishing  to  leave 
nothing  undone  on  my  part,  I  have  set  myself  to  put 
into  writing  some  principal  reasons,  chosen  for  the 
most  part  from  the  sermons  and  instructions  which  I 
have  hitherto  addressed  to  you  by  word  of  mouth,  in 
defence  of  the  faith  of  the  Church.  I  should  indeed 
have  wished  to  be  heard,  as  the  accusers  have  been ; 
for  words  in  the  mouth  are  living,  on  paper  dead. 
"  The  living  voice,"  says  S.  Jerome,  "  has  a  certain 
indescribable  secret  strength,  and  the  heart  is  far  more 
surely  reached  by  the  spoken  word  than  by  writing."  f 
This  it  is  which  made  the  glorious  Apostle  S.  Paul 
say  in  the  Scripture :  How  shall  they  believe  him  of 
whom  they  have  not  heard  ?  And  how  shall  they  hear 
without  a  preacher  ?  .  .  .  Faith  then  cometh  by  hearing, 
and  hearing  by  the  word  of  Christ.X  My  best  chance, 
then,  would  have  been  to  be  heard,  in  lack  of  which 
this  writing  will  not  be  without  good  results,  (i.) 
It  will  carry  to  your  houses  what  you  will  not  receive 

*  Addressed  to  the  inhabitants  of  Thonon.     [Tr.] 
t  Ep.  ad  Paulinum,  J  Rom.  x. 

III.  A 

2  The  Catholic  Controversy, 

at  our  house,  at  our  meetings.  (2.)  It  will  satisfy 
those  who,  as  sole  answer  to  the  arguments  I  bring 
forward,  say  that  they  would  like  to  see  them  laid 
before  some  minister,  and  who  believe  that  the  mere 
presence  of  the  adversary  would  make  them  tremble, 
grow  pale,  and  faint  away,  taking  from  them  all 
strength;  now  they  can  be  laid  before  them.  (3.) 
Writing  can  be  better  handled ;  it  gives  more  leisure 
for  consideration  than  the  voice  does;  it  can  be 
pondered  more  profoundly.  (4.)  It  will  be  seen  that 
I  deny  a  thousand  impieties  which  are  attributed  to 
Catholics ;  this  is  not  in  order  to  escape  from  the  diffi- 
culty, as  some  have  said,  but  to  follow  the  holy  inten- 
tion of  the  Church;  for  I  write  in  everybody's  sight, 
and  under  the  censorship  of  superiors,  being  assured 
that,  while  people  will  find  herein  plenty  of  ignorance, 
they  will  not  find,  God  helping,  any  irreligion  or  any 
opposition  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Church. 

I  must,  however,  protest,  for  the  relief  of  my  con- 
science, that  all  these  considerations  would  never  have 
made  me  take  the  resolution  of  writing.  It  is  a  trade 
which  requires  apprenticeship,  and  belongs  to  learned 
and  more  cultivated  minds.  To  write  well,  one  must 
know  extremely  well ;  mediocre  wits  must  content 
themselves  with  speech,  wherein  gesture,  voice,  play 
of  feature,  brighten  the  word.  Mine,  which  is  of  the 
less,  or,  to  say  the  downright  truth,  of  the  lowest 
degree  of  mediocrity,  is  not  made  to  succeed  in  this 
exercise ;  and  indeed  I  should  not  have  thought  of 
it,  if  a  grave  and  judicious  gentleman  had  not  invited 
and  encouraged  me  to  do  it :  afterwards  several  of  my 
chief  friends  approved  of  it,  whose  opinion  I  so  highly 
value  that  my  own  has  no  belief  from  me  save  in  default 

Author  s  Introdtcctton.  3 

of  other.  I  have  then  put  down  here  some  principal 
reasons  of  the  Catholic  faith,  which  clearly  prove  that 
all  are  in  fault  who  remain  separated  from  the  Catholic, 
Apostolic,  and  Roman  Church.  And  I  address  and  offer 
it  to  you  with  good  heart,  hoping  that  the  causes  which 
keep  you  from  hearing  me  will  not  have  power  to 
hinder  you  from  reading  what  I  write.  Meanwhile,  I 
assure  you,  that  you  will  never  read  a  writing  which 
shall  be  given  you  by  any  man  more  devoted  to  your 
spiritual  service  than  I  am  ;  and  I  can  truly  say  that  I 
shall  never  receive  a  command  with  more  hearty  accept- 
ance, than  I  did  that  which  Monseigneur,  our  most 
reverend  Bishop,  gave  me,  when  he  ordered  me,  accord- 
ing to  the  holy  desire  of  His  Highness,  whose  letter  he 
put  into  my  hand,  to  come  here  and  bring  you  the  holy 
Word  of  God.  Nor  did  I  think  that  I  could  ever  do 
you  a  greater  service.  And  in  fact  I  thought  that 
as  you  will  receive  no  other  law  for  your  belief  than 
that  interpretation  of  the  Scripture  which  seems  to 
you  the  best,  you  would  hear  also  the  interpretation 
which  I  should  bring,  viz.,  that  given  by  the  Apostolic 
Roman  Church,  which  hitherto  you  have  not  had 
except  perverted  and  quite  disfigured  and  adulterated 
by  the  enemy,  who  well  knew  that  had  you  seen  it  in 
its  purity,  never  would  you  have  abandoned  it.  The 
time  is  evil ;  the  Gospel  of  Peace  has  hard  striving 
to  get  heard  amid  so  many  rumours  of  war.  Still  I 
lose  not  courage ;  fruits  a  little  late  in  coming  pre- 
serve better  than  the  forward  ones.  I  trust  that  if 
Our  Lord  but  once  cry  in  your  ears  his  holy  Ephpheta, 
this  slowness  will  result  in  much  the  greater  sureness. 
Take  then,  gentlemen,  in  good  part,  this  present  which 
I  make  you,  and  read  my  reasons  attentively.     The 

4  The  Catholic  Controversy, 

hand  of  God  is  not  withered  nor  shortened,  and  readily 
shows  its  power  in  feeble  and  low  things.  If  you 
have  with  so  much  promptitude  heard  one  of  the 
parties,  have  yet  patience  to  hear  the  other.  Then 
take,  I  charge  you  on  the  part  of  G-od,  take  time  and 
leisure  to  calm  your  understanding,  and  pray  God  to 
assist  you  with  his  Holy  Spirit  in  a  question  of  such 
great  importance,  in  order  that  he  may  address  you 
unto  salvation.  But  above  all  I  beg  you  never  to  let 
other  passion  enter  your  spirits  than  the  passion  of 
Our  Lord  and  Master  Jesus  Christ,  by  which  we  all 
have  been  redeemed  and  shall  be  saved,  unless  we 
are  wanting  on  our  part;  since  he  desires  that  all 
men  should  he  saved  and  should  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  his  truth*  I  beseech  his  sacred  Majesty  that  he 
would  deign  to  help  me  and  you  in  this  aJBPair,  as  he 
deigned  to  regard  the  glorious  Apostle  S.  Paul  [whose] 
conversion  [we  celebrate]  to-day. 

All  comes  back  to  the  saying  of  the  prophet.  De- 
struction is  thy  own,  0  Israel !  t  Our  Lord  was  the 
true  Saviour  who  came  to  enlighten  every  man  and  to 
be  a  light  unto  the  revelation  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
glory  of  Israel ;  whereas  Israel  takes  hereby  occasion 
of  ignominy.  Is  not  this  a  great  misfortune  ?  And 
when  it  is  said  that  he  is  set  for  the  ruin  of  many, 
this  must  be  understood  as  to  the  actual  event,  not  as 
to  the  intention  of  the  divine  Majesty.  As  the  Tree 
of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  had  no  virtue  to 
teach  Adam  either  good  or  evil,  though  the  event  gave 
it  this  name,  because  Adam  by  taking  the  fruit  ex- 
perienced the  evil  which  his  disobedience  caused  him. 
The  Son  of  God  came  for  peace  and  benediction,  and 
*  I  Tim.  li.  4.  t  Osee  xiiL  9. 

Author  s  Introduetton.  5 

not  for  evil  to  meu  ;  unless  some  madman  would  dare 
to  cast  up  to  our  Lord  his  holy  Word :  Woe  to  that 
man  through  whom  scandal  cometh,  *  and  would  condemn 
him  by  his  own  law  to  have  a  millstone  tied  about 
his  neck  and  be  cast  into  the  depths  of  the  sea.  Let 
us  then  confess  that  not  one  of  us  men  is  scandalised 
save  by  his  own  fault.  This  is  what  I  undertake  to 
prove  by  force  of  argument.  0  my  God,  my  Saviour, 
purify  my  spirit ;  make  this  your  word  distil  sweetly 
into  the  hearts  of  my  readers,  as  a  sacred  dew,  to  cool 
the  ardour  of  the  passions  which  they  may  have ; 
and  they  shall  see  how  true,  in  you,  and  in  the  Church 
your  Spouse,  is  that  which  you  have  said. 

It  was,  I  think,  that  great  facility  which  men  find 
for  taking  scandal,  which  made  Our  Lord  say  that 
scandals  needs  must  come,^  or,  as  S.  Matthew  says, 
Woe  to  the  world  because  of  scandals;  J  for  if  men  take 
occasion  of  their  harm  from  the  sovereign  good  itself, 
how  could  there  not  be  scandals  in  a  world  where 
there  are  so  many  evils  ?  § 

Now  there  are  three  sorts  of  scandals,  and  all  three 
very  evil  in  their  nature,  but  unequally  so.  There  is 
a  scandal  which  our  learned  theologians  call  active. 
And  this  is  a  bad  action  which  gives  to  another  an 
occasion  of  wrong-doing,  and  the  person  who  does  this 
action  is  justly  called  scandalous.  The  two  other  sorts 
of  scandal  are  called  passive  scandals,  some  of  them^ 
passive  scandals  ah  extrinseco,  others  ab  intrinseco.  For 
of  persons  who  are  scandalised,  some  are  so  by  the  bad 
actions  of  another,  and  receive  the  active  scandal,  let- 
ting their  wills  be  affected  by  the  scandal ;  but  some 

*  Matt,  xviii.  7.  f  Luke  xvii.  i.  X  xviii,  7. 

§  See,  iu  note  to  Preface,  a  fuller  treatment  of  the  subject  of  scandal. 

6  The  Catholic  Controversy. 

are  so  by  their  own  malice,  and,  having  otherwise  no 
occasion,  build  and  fabricate  them  in  their  own  brain, 
and  scandalise  themselves  with  a  scandal  which  is  all 
of  their  own  making.  He  who  scandalises  another 
fails  in  charity  towards  his  neighbour,  he  who  scan- 
dalises himself  fails  in  charity  towards  himself,  and  he 
who  is  scandalised  by  another  is  wanting  in  strength 
and  firmness.  The  first  is  scandalous,  the  second 
scandalous  and  scandalised,  the  third  scandalised  only. 
The  first  scandal  is  called  datum,  given,  the  second 
acceptum^  taken,  the  third  rece'ptum,  received.  The 
first  passes  the  third  in  evil,  and  the  second  so  much 
passes  the  first  that  it  contains  first  and  second,  being 
active  and  passive  both  together,  as  the  murdering  and 
destroying  oneself  is  a  cruelty  more  against  nature 
than  the  killing  another.  All  these  kinds  of  scandal 
abound  in  the  world,  and  one  sees  nothing  so  plentiful 
as  scandal :  it  is  the  principal  trade  of  the  devil ; 
whence  Our  Lord  said,  Woe  to  the  world  because  of 
scandals.  But  scandal  taken  without  occasion  holds 
the  chief  place  by  every  right,  [being]  the  most  frequent, 
the  most  dangerous,  and  the  most  injurious. 

And  it  is  of  this  alone  that  Our  Lord  is  the  object 
in  souls  which  are  given  up  as  a  prey  to  iniquity. 
But  a  little  patience :  Our  Lord  cannot  be  scandalous, 
for  all  in  him  is  sovereignly  good ;  nor  scandalised, 
for  he  is  sovereignly  powerful  and  wise; — how  then 
can  it  happen  that  one  should  be  scandalised  in  him, 
and  that  he  should  be  set  for  the  ruin  of  many  ?  It 
would  be  a  horrible  blasphemy  to  attribute  our  evil 
to  his  Majesty.  He  wishes  that  every  one  should  be 
saved  and  should  come  to  the  knowledge  of  his  truth. 
He  would  have   no  one   perish.      Our  destruction   is 

Author  s  Introduction,  7 

from  ourselves,  and  our  hel'p  from  his  divine  good- 
ness.* Our  Lord  then  does  not  scandalise  us,  nor 
does  his  holy  Word,  but  we  are  scandalised  in  him, 
which  is  the  proper  way  of  speaking  in  this  point,  as 
himself  teaches,  saying :  Blessed  is  he  that  shall  not  he 
scandalised  in  me.t  And  when  it  is  said  that  he  has 
been  set  for  the  ruin  of  many,  we  must  find  this 
verified  in  the  event,  which  was  that  many  were 
ruined  on  account  of  him,  not  in  the  intention  of  the 
supreme  goodness,  which  had  only  sent  him  as  a  light 
for  the  revelation  of  the  Gentiles  and  for  the  glory  of 
Israel.  But  if  there  are  men  who  would  say  the 
contrary,  they  have  nothing  left  [as  I  have  said]  but 
to  curse  their  Saviour  with  his  own  words :  Woe  t6 
him  by  whom  scandal  cometh. 

I  beseech  you,  let  us  look  in  ourselves  for  the  cause 
of  our  vices  and  sins.  Our  will  is  the  only  source  of 
them.  Our  mother  Eve  indeed  tried  to  throw  the 
blame  on  the  serpent,  and  her  husband  to  throw  it  on 
her,  but  the  excuse  was  not  valid.  They  would  have 
done  better  to  say  the  honest  peccavi,  as  David  did, 
whose  sin  was  immediately  forgiven. 

I  have  said  all  this,  gentlemen,  to  make  known  to 
you  whence  comes  this  great  dissension  of  wills  in 
matter  of  religion,  which  we  see  amongst  those  who  in 
their  mouths  make  profession  of  Christianity.  This  is 
the  principal  and  sovereign  scandal  of  the  world,  and, 
in  comparison  with  the  others,  it  alone  deserves  the 
name  of  scandal,  and  it  seems  to  be  almost  exactly  the 
same  thing  when  Our  Lord  says  it  is  necessary  that 

*  The  Saint  adds  in  margin  :  This  is  the  will  of  God,  your  sanctifica' 
tion.     I  Thess.  iv.  3.     [Tr.] 
•*"  Matt.  xi.  6, 

8  The  Catholic  Controversy, 

scandals  come,  and  St.  Paul  says  that  there  must  he 
hei^esies  ;  *  for  this  scandal  changes  with  time,  and,  like 
a  violent  movement,  gradually  grows  weaker  in  its  evil- 
ness.  In  those  Christians  who  begin  the  division  and 
this  civil  war,  heresy  is  a  scandal  simply  taken,  passive 
ah  intrinseco,  and  there  is  no  evil  in  the  heresiarch  save 
such  as  is  entirely  in  his  own  will;  no  one  has  part 
in  this  but  himself.  The  scandal  of  the  first  whom  he 
seduces  already  begins  to  be  divided ; — but  unequally, 
for  the  heresiarch  has  his  share  therein  on  account  of 
his  solicitation,  the  seduced  have  a  share  as  much  the 
greater  as  they  have  had  less  occasion  of  following 
him.  Their  heresy  having  taken  root,  those  who  are 
born  of  heretical  parents  among  the  heretics  have  ever 
less  share  in  the  fault :  still  neither  these  nor  those 
come  to  be  without  considerable  fault  of  their  own, 
and  particularly  persons  of  this  age,  who  are  almost 
all  in  purely  passive  scandal.  For  the  Scripture  which 
they  handle,  the  neighbourhood  of  true  Christians,  the 
marks  which  they  see  in  the  true  Church,  take  from 
them  all  proper  excuse ;  so  that  the  Church  from  whom 
they  are  separated  can  put  before  them  the  words  of 
her  Lord :  Search  the  Scripticres,  for  you  think  in  them 
to  have  life  everlasting :  and  the  same  are  they  that  give 
testimony  of  meA  The  works  that  I  do  in  the  name  of 
my  Father,  they  give  testimony  of  me.^ 

Now  I  have  said  that  their  scandal  is  purely  or 
almost  purely  passive.  For  it  is  well  known  that  the 
occasion  they  pretend  to  have  for  their  division  and 
departure  is  the  error,  the  ignorance,  the  idolatry, 
which  they  aver  to  be  in  the  Church  they  have  aban- 
doned, while  it  is  a  thing  perfectly  certain  that  the 

*  I  Cor.  xi.  19.  t  Johu  v.  39.  J  lb.  x.  25. 

Author  s  Introduction,  9 

Church  in  her  general  body  cannot  be  scandalous,  or 
scandalised,  being  like  her  Lord,  who  communicates  to 
her  by  grace  and  particular  assistance  what  is  proper  to 
him  by  nature :  for  being  her  Head  he  guides  her 
feet  in  the  right  way.  The  Church  is  his  mystical 
body,  and  therefore  he  takes  as  his  own  the  honour 
and  the  dishonour  that  are  given  to  her ;  so  it  cannot 
be  said  that  she  gives,  takes,  or  receives  any  scandal. 
Those  then  who  are  scandalised  in  her  do  all  the  wrong 
and  have  all  the  fault :  their  scandal  has  no  other 
subject  than  their  own  malice,  which  keeps  ever  tick- 
ling them  to  make  them  laugh  in  their  iniquities. 

See  then  what  I  intend  to  show  in  this  little  treatise. 
I  have  no  other  aim  than  to  make  you  see,  gentlemen, 
that  this  Susanna  is  wrongfully  accused,  and  that  she 
is  justified  in  lamenting  over  all  those  who  have  turned 
aside  from  her  commandments  in  the  words  of  her 
Spouse :  They  ham  hated  me  without  cause* 

This  I  will  do  in  two  ways :  (i.)  ^7  certain  general 
reasons  ;  (2.)  by  particular  examples  which  I  will  bring 
forward  of  the  principal  difficulties,  by  way  of  illus- 
tration. All  that  so  many  learned  men  have  written 
tends  and  returns  to  this,  but  not  in  a  straight  line. 
For  each  one  proposes  a  particular  path  to  follow.  I 
will  try  to  reduce  all  the  lines  of  my  argument  to  this 
point  as  to  the  centre  as  exactly  as  I  can.  The  first 
part  will  serve  almost  equally  for  all  sorts  of  heretics : 
the  second  will  be  addressed  rather  to  those  whose 
reunion  we  have  the  strongest  duty  to  effect.  So  many 
great  personages  have  written  in  our  age,  that  their 
posterity  have  scarcely  anything  more  to  say,  but  have 
only  to  consider,  learn,  imitate,  admire.     I  will  there- 

*  John  XV.  25. 

lo  The  Catholic  Controversy. 

fore  say  nothing  new  and  would  not  wish  to  do  so. 
All  is  ancient,  and  there  is  almost  nothing  of  mine 
beyond  the  needle  and  thread :  the  rest  I  have  only 
had  to  unpick  and  sew  again  in  my  own  way,  with 
this  warning  of  Vincent  of  Lerins :  "  Teach,  however, 
what  thou  hast  learnt ;  that  whilst  thou  sayest  things 
in  a  new  way  thou  say  not  new  things."  ^ 

This  treatise  will  seem  perhaps  to  some  a  little  too 
meagre :  this  does  not  come  from  my  stinginess  but 
from  my  poverty.  My  memory  has  very  little  stored 
up,  and  is  kept  going  only  from  day  to  day;  and  I 
have  but  very  few  books  here  with  which  I  can  enrich 
myself.  But  still  receive  favourably,  I  beg  you, 
gentlemen  of  Thonon,  this  work,  and  though  you  have 
seen  many  better  made  and  richer,  still  give  some  little 
of  your  attention  to  this,  which  will  perhaps  be  more 
adapted  to  your  taste  than  the  others  are ;  for  its  air 
is  entirely  Savoyard,  and  one  of  the  most  profitable 
prescriptions,  and  the  last  remedy,  is  a  return  to  one's 
natal  air.  If  this  profit  you  not,  you  shall  try  others 
more  pure  and  more  invigorating,  for  there  are,  thank 
God,  of  all  sorts  in  this  country.  I  am  about  there- 
fore to  begin,  in  the  name  of  God,  whom  I  most 
humbly  beseech  to  make  his  holy  Word  distil  sweetly 
as  a  refreshing  dew  into  your  heart.  And  I  beg  you, 
gentlemen,  and  those  who  read  this,  to  remember  the 
words  of  S.  Paul:  Let  all  hitterness  and  anger ^  and 
indignation,  and  clamour^  and  blasphemy  he  taken  away 
from  you,  with  all  malice.     Ameoi.f 

*  Comm.  1"«^-  cap.  xxxvii.  +  Eph.  iv.  31. 


AIM  6  6  ( 0  n» 



First,  then,  your  ministers  had  not  the  conditions 
required  for  the  position  which  they  sought  to 
maintain,  and  the  enterprise  which  they  undertook. 
"Wherefore  they  are  inexcusable;  and  you  yourselves 
also,  who  knew  and  still  know  or  ought  to  know,  this 
defect  in  them,  have  done  very  wrong  in  receiving 
them  under  such  colours.  The  office  they  claimed 
was  that  of  ambassadors  of  Jesus  Christ  Our  Lord ; 
the  affair  they  undertook  was  to  declare  a  formal 
divorce  between  Our  Lord  and  the  ancient  Church  his 
Spouse ;  to  arrange  and  conclude  by  words  of  present 
consent,  as  lawful  procurators,  a  second  and  new 
marriage  with  this  young  madam,  of  better  grace,  said 
they,  and  more  seemly  than  the  other.  For  in  effect, 
to  stand  up  as  preacher  of  God's  Word  and  pastor 
of  souls, — what   is  it  but  to  call  oneself  ambassador 

1 2  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

and  legate  of  Our  Lord,  according  to  that  of  the 
Apostle  :  *  We  art  therefore  ambassadors  for  Christ  / 
And  to  say  that  the  whole  of  Christendom  has  failed, 
that  the  whole  Church  has  erred,  and  all  truth  dis- 
appeared,— what  is  this  but  to  say  that  Our  Lord  has 
abandoned  his  Church,  has  broken  the  sacred  tie  of 
marriage  he  had  contracted  with  her  ?  And  to  put 
forward  a  new  Church, — is  it  not  to  attempt  to  thrust 
upon  this  sacred  and  holy  Husband  a  second  wife  ? 
This  is  what  the  ministers  of  the  pretended  church 
have  undertaken ;  this  is  what  they  boast  of  having 
done ;  this  has  been  the  aim  of  their  discourses,  their 
designs,  their  writings.  But  what  an  injustice  have 
you  not  committed  in  believing  them  ?  How  did  you 
come  to  take  their  word  so  simply  ?  How  did  you 
so  lightly  give  them  credit  ? 

To  be  legates  and  ambassadors  they  should  have 
been  sent,  they  should  have  had  letters  of  credit  from 
him  whom  they  boasted  of  being  sent  by.  The  affairs 
were  of  the  greatest  importance,  for  there  was  question 
of  disturbing  the  whole  Church.  The  persons  who 
undertook  them  were  extraordinaries,  of  mean  quality, 
and  private  persons ;  while  the  ordinary  pastors  were 
men  of  mark,  and  of  most  ancient  and  acknowledged 
reputation,  who  contradicted  them  and  protested  that 
these  extraordinaries  had  no  charge  nor  commandment 
of  the  Master.  Tell  me,  what  business  had  you  to 
hear  them  and  believe  them  without  having  any 
assurance  of  their  commission  and  of  the  approval  of 
Our  Lord,  whose  legates  they  called  themselves  ?  In 
a  word,  you  have  no  justification  for  having  quitted 
that  ancient  Church  in  which  you  were  baptized,  on  the 

*  2  Cor.  V.  20. 

CHAP.  II.]  Mission.  13 

faith  of  preachers  who  had  no  legitimate  mission  from 
the  Master. 

Now  you  cannot  be  ignorant  that  they  neither  had, 
nor  have,  in  any  way  at  all,  this  mission.  For  if  Our 
Lord  had  sent  them,  it  would  have  been  either  medi- 
ately or  immediately.  We  say  mission  is  given  medi- 
ately when  we  are  sent  by  one  who  has  from  God  the 
power  of  sending,  according  to  the  order  which  he  has 
appointed  in  his  Church ;  and  such  was  the  mission 
of  S.  Denis  into  France  by  Clement  and  of  Timothy 
by  S.  Paul.  Immediate  mission  is  when  God  himself 
commands  and  gives  a  charge,  without  the  interposition 
of  the  ordinary  authority  which  he  has  placed  in  the 
prelates  and  pastors  of  the  Church :  as  S.  Peter  and 
the  Apostles  were  sent,  receiving  from  Our  Lord's 
own  mouth  this  commandment :  Go  ye  into  the,  whole 
worlds  and  'preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature  ;  *  and 
as  Moses  received  his  mission  to  Pharao  and  to  the 
people  of  Israel.  But  neither  in  the  one  nor  in  the 
other  way  have  your  ministers  any  mission.  How 
then  have  they  undertaken  to  preach  ?  How  shall  they 
preach,  says  the  Apostle,  unless  they  he  sent  ?  t 



And  first,  as  to  ordinary  and  mediate  mission,  they 
have  none  whatever.  For  what  they  can  put  forward 
is  either  that  they  are  sent  by  the  people  and  secular 

*  Mark  xvi.  15.  t  Rom.  x.  15. 

14  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

princes,  or  else  that  they  are  sent  by  the  imposition 
of  the  hands  of  the  bishops  who  made  them  priests,  a 
dignity  to  which  at  last  they  must  have  recourse, 
although  they  despise  it  altogether  and  everywhere. 

Now,  if  they  say  that  the  secular  magistrates  and 
people  have  sent  them,  they  will  have  two  proofs  to  give 
which  they  never  can  give,  the  one  that  the  seculars  have 
done  it,  the  other  that  they  could  do  it,  for  we  deny 
both  the  fact  and  the  right  (factum  et  jus  faciendi). 

And  that  they  could  not  do  it  the  reason  is  absolute. 
For  (i.)  they  will  never  find  that  the  people  and 
secular  magistrates  had  the  power  to  establish  and 
institute  bishops  in  the  Church.^  They  will  indeed 
perhaps  find  that  the  people  have  given  testimony  and 
assisted  at  ordinations ;  yea,  perhaps,  that  the  choice 
has  been  given  to  them,  like  that  of  the  deacons,  as 
S.  Luke  tells  us  (Acts  vi.),  which  the  whole  body 
of  the  faithful  made ;  but  they  will  never  show  that 
the  people  or  secular  princes  have  authority  to  give 
mission  or  to  appoint  pastors.  How  then  do  they 
allege  a  mission  by  people  or  princes,  which  has  no 
foundation  in  the  Scripture  ?  (2.)  On  the  contrary, 
we  bring  forward  the  express  practice  of  the  whole 
Church,  which  from  all  time  has  been  to  ordain  the 
pastors  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  other 
pastors  and  bishops.  Thus  was  Timothy  ordained; 
and  the  seven  deacons  themselves,  though  proposed 
by  the  Christian  people,  were  ordained  by  the  imposi- 

*  The  Saint  in  a  detached  note  elsewhere  draws  particular  attention 
to  the  necessity  of  mission  shown  in  the  fact  that  Jeroboam  is  rebuked 
not  for  dividing  the  kingdom  but  for  dividing  the  Church,  and  making 
temples  in  the  high  places,  and  priests  of  the  lowest  of  the  people,  who 
were  not  sons  of  Levi.     (3  Kings  xii.  31.) 

CHAP.  II.]  Mission.  15 

tion  of  the  Apostles'  hands.  Thus  have  the  Apostles 
appointed  in  their  Constitutions ;  and  the  great  Council 
of  Nice  (which  methinks  one  will  not  despise)  and  that 
of  Carthage — the  second,  and  then  immediately  the 
third,  and  the  fourth,  at  which  S.  Augustine  assisted. 
If  then  they  have  been  sent  by  the  laity,  they  are  not 
sent  in  Apostolic  fashion,  nor  legitimately,  and  their 
mission  is  null.  (3.)  In  fact,  the  laity  have  no  mis- 
sion, and  how  then  shall  they  give  it  ?  How  shall 
they  communicate  the  authority  which  they  have  not  ? 
And  therefore  S.  Paul,  speaking  of  the  priesthood  and 
pastoral  order,  says :  Neither  doth  any  man  talce  the 
honour  to  himself  hut  he  that  is  called  hy  God,  as  Aaron 
was  (Heb.  x.  4).  Now  Aaron  was  consecrated  and 
ordained  by  the  hands  of  Moses,  who  was  a  priest 
himself,  according  to  the  holy  word  of  David  (Ps. 
xcviii.  7),  Moses  and  Aaron  among  his  priests  and 
Samuel  among  those  who  call  upon  his  name ;  and,  as 
is  indicated  in  Exodus  (xxviii.  i)  in  this  word,  Take 
unto  thee  also  Aaro7i  thy  brother,  with  his  sons  .  .  .  that 
they  may  minister  to  me  in  the  priest's  office;  with 
which  agree  a  great  army  of  our  Ancients.  Whoever 
then  would  assert  his  mission  must  not  assert  it 
as  being  from  the  people  nor  from  secular  princes. 
For  Aaron  was  not  called  in  that  way,  and  we  cannot 
be  called  otherwise  than  he  was.  (4.)  Finally,  that 
which  is  less  is  blessed  by  the  better,  as  S.  Paul  says 
(Heb.  vii.  7).  The  people  then  cannot  send  the 
pastors ;  for  the  pastors  are  greater  than  the  people, 
and  mission  is  not  given  without  blessing.""  For  after 
this  magnificent  mission  the  people  remain  sheep,  and 

*  Amen,  Amen,  I  say  to  you;  the  servant  is  not  greater  than  his  Lord^ 
neither  is  an  A;posUe  greater  than  he  that  sent  him  (John  xiii.  i6). 

1 6  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  l 

the  shepherd  remains  shepherd.  (5.)  I  do  not  insist 
here,  as  I  will  prove  it  hereafter,  that  the  Church  is 
monarchical,  and  that  therefore  the  right  of  sending 
belongs  to  the  chief  pastor,  not  to  the  people.  I  omit 
the  disorder  which  would  arise  if  the  people  sent ;  for 
they  could  not  send  to  one  another,  one  people  having 
no  authority  over  the  other ; — and  what  free  play  would 
this  give  to  all  sorts  of  heresies  and  fancies  ?  It  is 
necessary  then  that  the  sheep  should  receive  the  shepherd 
from  elsewhere,  and  should  not  give  him  to  themselves.'''^ 
The  people  therefore  were  not  able  to  give  legiti- 
mate mission  or  commission  to  these  new  ambassadors. 
But  I  say  further  that  even  if  they  could  they  did  not. 
For  this  people  was  of  the  true  Church  or  not:  if 
it  was  of  the  true  Church  why  did  Luther  take  it 
therefrom  ?  Would  it  really  have  called  him  in  order 
to  be  taken  out  of  its  place  and  of  the  Church? 
And  if  it  were  not  of  the  true  Church,  how  could 
it  have  the  right  of  mission  and  of  vocation  ? — out- 
side the  true  Church  there  cannot  be  such  authority. 
If  they  say  this  people  was  not  Catholic,  what  was 
it  then  ?  It  was  not  Lutheran ;  for  we  all  know 
that  when  Luther  began  to  preach  in  Germany  there 
were  no  Lutherans,  and  it  was  he  who  was  their 
origin.  Since  then  such  a  people  did  not  belong  to 
the  true  Church,  how  could  it  give  mission  for  true 
preaching  ?  They  have  then  no  vocation  from  that 
source,  unless  they  have  recourse  to  the  invisible 
mission  received  from  the  principalities  and  powers  of 
the  world  of  this  darkness,  and  the  spiritual  wicked- 

*  Here  may  be  added  a  detached  note  of  the  Saint's.  •'  Acts  xv.  24  : 
Forasmuch  as  we  have  heard  that  some  who  went  out  from  us  have  troubled 
you  with  words,  to  whom  we  gave  no  commands.  If  they  had  given 
charge,  much  less  would  they  themselves  teach  without  charge." 

CHAP.  II.]  Mission.  17 

nesses  against  which  good  Catholics  have  always  waged 
war.  Many  therefore  of  our  age,  seeing  the  road  cut  off 
on  that  side,  have  betaken  themselves  to  the  other,  and 
say  that  the  first  masters  and  reformers, — Luther, 
Bucer,  CEcolampadius, — were  sent  by  the  bishops  who 
made  them  priests ;  then  they  sent  their  followers, 
and  so  they  would  go  on  to  blend  their  rights  with 
those  of  the  Apostles. 

In  good  sooth  it  is  to  speak  frankly  {'parler 
Frangais)  and  plainly  indeed,  thus  to  confess  that 
mission  can  only  have  passed  to  their  ministers  from 
the  Apostles  by  the  succession  of  our  bishops  and 
the  imposition  of  their  hands.  Of  course  the  case  is 
really  so :  one  cannot  give  this  mission  so  high  a 
fall  that  from  the  Apostles  it  should  leap  into  the 
hands  of  the  preachers  of  now-a-days  without  having 
touched  any  of  our  ancients  and  foregoers :  it  would 
have  required  a  very  long  speaking-tube  (sarhacane) 
in  the  mouth  of  the  first  founders  of  the  Church  to 
call  Luther  and  the  rest  without  being  overheard  by 
any  of  those  who  were  between :  or  else,  as  Calvin 
says  on  another  occasion,  not  much  to  the  point, 
these  must  have  had  very  long  ears.  It  must  have 
been  kept  sound  indeed,  if  these  were  to  find  it.  We 
agree  then  that  missiou  was  possessed  by  our  bishops, 
and  particularly  by  their  head,  the  Eoman  Bishop.  But 
we  formally  deny  that  your  ministers  have  had  any 
communication  of  it,  to  preach  what  they  have 
preached.  Because  (i.)  they  preach  things  contrary  to 
the  Church  in  which  they  have  been  ordained  priests ; 
therefore  either  they  err  or  the  Church  which  has  sent 
them  errs; — and  consequently  either  their  church  is 
false  or  the  one  from  which  they  have  taken  mission. 
III.  B 

1 8  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

If  it  be  that  from  which  they  have  taken  mission, 
their  mission  is  false,  for  from  a  false  Church  there 
cannot  spring  a  true  mission.  Whichever  way  it  be, 
they  had  no  mission  to  preach  what  they  preached, 
because,  if  the  Church  in  which  they  have  been 
ordained  were  true,  they  are  heretics  for  having  left  it, 
and  for  having  preached  against  its  belief,  and  if  it 
A^ere  not  true  it  could  not  give  them  mission.  (2.) 
Besides,  though  they  had  had  mission  in  the  Eoman 
Church,  they  had  none  to  leave  it,  and  withdraw  her 
children  from  her  obedience.  Truly  the  commissioner 
must  not  exceed  the  limits  of  his  commission,  or  his 
act  is  null.  (3.)  Luther,  QEcolampadius,  and  Calvin 
were  not  bishops :  how  then  could  they  communicate 
any  mission  to  their  successors  on  the  part  of  the 
Eoman  Church,  which  protests  always  and  everywhere 
that  it  is  only  the  bishops  who  can  send,  and  that  this 
belongs  in  no  way  to  simple  priests  ?  In  which  even 
S.  Jerome  has  placed  the  difference  between  the  simple 
priest  and  the  bishop,  in  the  Epistle  to  Evagrius,  and 
S.  Augustine  ^^  and  Epiphanius  t  reckon  Aerius  with 
heretics  because  he  held  the  contrary. 



These  reasons   are  so  strong  that  the  most  solid   of 

your  party  have  taken  ground  elsewhere  than  in  the 

ordinary  mission,  and  have  said  that  they  were  sent 

*  De  Ecer.  53.  t  Eoeres.  75. 

CHAP.  III.]  Mission,  19 

extraordinarily  by  God  because  the  ordinary  mission 
had  been  ruined  and  abolished,  with  the  true  Church 
itself,  under  the  tyranny  of  Antichrist.  This  is  their 
most  safe  refuge,  which,  since  it  is  common  to  all  sorts 
of  heretics,  is  worth  attacking  in  good  earnest  and 
overthrowing  completely.  Let  us  then  place  our 
argument  in  order,  to  see  if  we  can  force  this  their 
last  barricade. 

First,  I  say  then  that  no  one  should  allege  an 
extraordinary  mission  unless  he  prove  it  by  miracles : 
for,  I  pray  you,  where  should  we  be  if  this  pretext  of 
extraordinary  mission  was  to  be  accepted  without  proof  ? 
Would  it  not  be  a  cloak  for  all  sorts  of  reveries  ? 
Arius,  Marcion,  Montanus,  Messalius — could  they  not 
be  received  into  this  dignity  of  reformers,  by  swearing 
the  same  oath  ? 

Never  was  any  one  extraordinarily  sent  unless  he 
brought  this  letter  of  credit  from  the  divine  Majesty. 
Moses  was  sent  immediately  by  God  to  govern  the 
people  of  Israel.  He  wished  to  know  his  name  who 
sent  him ;  when  he  had  learnt  the  admirable  name  of 
God,  he  asked  for  signs  and  patents  of  his  commission : 
God  so  far  found  this  request  good  that  he  gave  him 
the  grace  of  three  sorts  of  prodigies  and  marvels,  which 
were,  so  to  speak,  three  attestations  in  three  different 
languages,  of  the  charge  which  he  gave  him,  in  order 
that  any  one  who  did  not  understand  one  might 
understand  another.  If  then  they  allege  extraordinary 
mission,  let  them  show  us  some  extraordinary  works, 
otherwise  we  are  not  obliged  to  believe  them.  In 
truth  Moses  clearly  shows  the  necessity  of  this  proof 
for  him  who  would  speak  extraordinarily :  for  having 
to  beg  from  God  the  gift  of  eloquence,  he  only  asks  it 

20  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

after  having  the  power  of  miracles ;  showing  that  it  is 
more  necessary  to  have  authority  to  speak  than  to 
have  readiness  in  speaking. 

The  mission  of  S.  John  Baptist,  though  it  was  not 
altogether  extraordinary, — was  it  not  authenticated 
by  his  conception,  his  nativity,  and  even  by  that 
miraculous  life  of  his,  to  which  our  Lord  gave  such 
excellent  testimony  ?  But  as  to  the  Apostles, — who 
does  not  know  the  miracles  they  did  and  the  great 
number  of  them  ?  Their  handkerchiefs,  their  shadow, 
served  for  the  prompt  healing  of  the  sick  and  driving 
away  of  the  devils :  hy  the  hands  of  the  apostles  many 
signs  and  wonders  were  done  amongst  the  people  (Acts 
xix.  V.) ;  and  that  this  was  in  confirmation  of  their 
preaching  S.  Mark  declares  quite  explicitly  in  the  last 
words  of  his  Gospel,  and  S.  Paul  to  the  Hebrews  (ii. 
4).  How  then  shall  those  who  in  our  age  would 
allege  an  extraordinary  mission  excuse  and  relieve 
themselves  of  this  proof  of  their  mission  ?  What 
privilege  have  they  greater  than  an  Apostolic,  a 
Mosaic  ?  What  shall  I  say  more.  If  our  sovereign 
Master,  consubstantial  with  the  Father,  having  a 
mission  so  authentic  that  it  comprises  the  communica- 
tion of  the  same  essence,  if  he  himself,  I  say,  who  is  the 
living  source  of  all  Ecclesiastical  mission,  has  not 
chosen  to  dispense  himself  from  this  proof  of  miracles, 
what  reason  is  there  that  these  new  ministers  should 
be  believed  on  their  mere  word  ?  Our  Lord  very  often 
alleges  his  mission  to  give  credit  to  his  words : — As 
my  Father  hath  sent  me  I  also  send  you  (John  xx. 
21);  My  doctrine  is  not  mine,  hut  of  him  that  sent  me 
(ibid.  vii.  1 6) ;  You  doth  knoiv  me,  and  you  know  tvhence 
I  am;  and  I  am  not  come  of  myself  (ibid.   28).     But 

OHAP.  III.]  Mission,  21 

also,  to  give  authority  to  his  mission,  he  brings  forward 
his  miracles,  and  attests  that  if  he  had  not  done  among 
the  Jews  works  which  no  other  man  had  done,  they 
would  not  have  sinned  in  not  believing  him.  And  else- 
where he  says  to  them :  Do  you  not  believe  that  I  am 
in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me  ?  Otherwise  believe 
for  the  luorhs  themselves  (ibid.  xiv.  11,  12).  He  then  who 
would  be  so  rash  as  to  boast  of  extraordinary  mission 
without  immediately  producing  miracles,  deserves  to 
be  taken  for  an  impostor.  Now  it  is  a  fact  that  neither 
the  first  nor  the  last  ministers  have  worked  a  single 
miracle  :  therefore  they  have  no  extraordinary  mission. 
Let  us  proceed. 

I  say,  in  the  second  place,  that  never  must  an  ex- 
traordinary mission  be  received  when  disowned  by  the 
ordinary  authority  which  is  in  the  Church  of  Our  Lord. 
For,  (i.)  we  are  obliged  to  obey  our  ordinary  pastors 
under  pain  of  being  heathens  and  publicans  (Matt, 
xviii.  17)  : — how  then  can  we  place  ourselves  under 
other  discipline  than  theirs  ?  Extraordinaries  would 
come  in  vain,  since  we  should  be  obliged  to  refuse  to 
listen  to  them,  in  the  case  that  they  were,  as  I  have 
said,  disowned  by  the  ordinaries.  (2.)  God  is  not  the 
author  of  dissension,  but  of  union  and  peace  (l  Cor. 
xiv.  33),  principally  amongst  his  disciples  and  Church 
ministers ;  as  Our  Lord  clearly  shows  in  the  holy 
prayer  he  made  to  his  Father  in  the  last  days  of  his 
mortal  life  (John  xvii.) 

How  then  should  he  authorise  two  sorts  of  pastors, 
the  one  extraordinary,  the  other  ordinary  ?  As  to  the 
ordinary — it  certainly  is  authorised,  and  as  to  the 
extraordinary  we  are  supposing  it  to  be;  there  would 
then  be  two  different  churches,  which  is  contrary  to 

2  2  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

the  most  pure  word  of  Our  Lord,  who  has  but  one 
sole  spouse,  one  sole  dove,  one  sole  perfect  one  (Cant, 
vi.)  And  how  could  that  be  a  united  flock  which 
should  be  led  by  two  shepherds,  unknown  to  each 
other,  into  different  pastures,  with  different  calls 
and  folds,  and  each  of  them  expecting  to  have  the 
whole.  Thus  would  it  be  with  the  Church  under  a 
variety  of  pastors  ordinary  and  extraordinary,  dragged 
hither  and  thither  into  various  sects.  Or  is  Our  Lord 
divided  (i  Cor.  i.  13),  either  in  himself  or  in  his 
body,  which  is  the  Church  ? — no,  in  good  truth.  On 
the  contrary,  there  is  but  one  Lord,  who  has  composed 
his  mystic  body  with  a  goodly  variety  of  members,  a 
body  compacted  and  fitly  joined  together  hy  ivliat  every 
joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  operation  in  the  measure 
of  every  part  (Eph.  iv.  16).  Therefore  to  try  to  make  in 
the  Church  this  division  of  ordinary  and  extraordinary 
members  is  to  ruin  and  destroy  it.  We  must  then 
return  to  what  we  said,  that  an  extraordinary  vocation 
is  never  legitimate  where  it  is  disapproved  of  by  the 
ordinary.  (3.)  And  in  effect  where  will  you  ever  show 
me  a  legitimate  extraordinary  vocation  which  has  not 
been  received  by  the  ordinary  authority.  S.  Paul  was 
extraordinarily  called, — but  was  he  not  approved  and 
authorised  by  the  ordinary  once  and  again  ?  (Acts  ix. 
xiii.)  And  the  mission  received  from  the  ordinary 
authority  is  called  a  mission  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (ibid, 
xiii.  4).  The  mission  of  S.  John  Baptist  cannot  pro- 
perly be  called  extraordinary,  because  he  taught  nothing 
contrary  to  the  Mosaic  Church,  and  because  he  was 
of  the  priestly  race.  All  the  same,  his  doctrine  being 
unusual  was  approved  by  the  ordinary  teaching  office 
of  the  Jewish  Church  in  the  high  embassy  which  was 

CHAP.  III.]  Mission.  23 

sent  to  him  by  the  priests  and  Levites  (John  i.  19), 
the  tenor  of  which  implies  the  great  esteem  and  re- 
putation in  which  he  was  with  them ;  and  the  very 
Pharisees  who  were  seated  on  the  chair  of  Moses, — 
did  they  not  come  to  communicate  in  his  baptism 
quite  openly  and  unhesitatingly  ?  This  truly  was  to 
receive  his  mission  in  good  earnest.  Did  not  Our 
Lord,  who  was  the  Master,  will  to  be  received  by 
Simeon,  who  was  a  priest,  as  appears  from  his  blessing 
Our  Lady  and  Joseph ;  by  Zachary  the  priest ;  and  by 
S.  John  ?  And  for  his  passion,  which  was  the  prin- 
cipal fulfilment  of  his  mission, — did  he  not  will  to 
have  the  prophetic  testimony  of  him  who  was  High 
Piiest  at  that  time.  And  this  is  what  S.  Paul  teaches 
when  he  will  have  no  man  to  take  the,  pastoral 
honour  to  himself,  hut  he,  that  is  called  ly  God,  as 
Aaron  was  (Heb.  v.  4).  For  the  vocation  of  Aaron 
was  made  by  the  ordinary,  Moses,  so  that  it  was  not 
God  who  placed  his  holy  word  in  the  mouth  of  Aaron 
immediately,  but  Moses,  whom  God  commanded  to  do 
it :  Speak  to  him,  and  put  my  ivords  in  his  mouth  ;  and 
I  will  he  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  his  mouth  (Ex.  iv.  15). 
And  if  we  consider  the  words  of  S.  Paul,  we  shall 
further  learn  that  the  vocation  of  pastors  and  Church 
rulers  must  be  made  visibly ;  and  so  with  Our  Lord 
and  Master; — who,  being  sovereign  pontiff,  and  pastor 
of  all  the  ages,  did  not  glorify  himself,  that  is,  did  not 
take  to  himself  the  honour  of  his  holy  priesthood,  as  S. 
Paul  had  previously  said,  hut  he  who  said  to  him: 
Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  hegotten  thee ;  and. 
Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever  according  to  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedech.  I  beg  you  to  ponder  this  expression — Jesus 
Christ  is  a  high  priest  according  to  the  order  of  Melchise- 

24  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

deck.  Was  he  inducted  and  thrust  into  this  honour 
by  himself  ?  No,  he  was  called  thereto.  Who  called 
him  ?  His  eternal  Father.  And  how  ?  Immediately 
and  at  the  same  time  mediately :  immediately  at  his 
Baptism  and  his  Transfiguration,  by  this  voice :  This 
is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased,  hear 
ye  him;  mediately  by  the  Prophets,  and  above  all  by 
David  in  the  places  which  S.  Paul  cites  to  this  effect 
from  the  Psalms :  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  1 
begotten  thee :  Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever  according  to 
the  order  of  Melchisedech.  And  everywhere  the  voca- 
tion is  externally  perceptible :  the  word  in  the  cloud 
was  heard,  and  in  David  heard  and  read ;  but  S.  Paul 
when  proving  the  vocation  of  Our  Lord  quotes  only 
the  passage  from  David,  in  which  he  says  Our  Lord 
had  been  glorified  by  his  Father ;  thus  contenting  him- 
self with  bringing  forward  the  testimony  which  was 
perceptible,  and  given  by  means  of  the  ordmary  Scrip- 
tures and  the  received  Prophets. 

I  say,  thirdly,  that  the  authority  of  the  extraordinary 
mission  never  destroys  the  ordinary,  and  is  never  given 
to  overthrow  it.  Witness  all  the  Prophets,  who  never 
set  up  altar  against  altar,  never  overthrew  the  priest- 
hood of  Aaron,  never  abolished  the  constitutions  of 
the  Synagogue.  Witness  Our  Lord,  who  declares  that 
every  kingdom  divided  against  itself  shall  he  brought  to 
desolation,  and  a  house  upon  a  house  shall  fall  (Luke  xi. 
17).  Witness  the  respect  which  he  paid  to  the  chair 
of  Moses,  the  doctrine  of  which  he  would  have  to  be 
observed.  And  indeed  if  the  extraordinary  ought  to 
abolish  the  ordinary,  how  should  we  know  when,  and 
how,  and  to  whom,  to  give  our  obedience.  No,  no ;  the 
ordinary  is  immortal  for  such  time  as  the  Church  is 

CHAP.  III.]  Mission,  25 

here  below  in  the  world.  The  pastors  and  teachers 
whom  he  has  once  given  to  the  Church  are  to  have  a 
perpetual  succession  for  the,  'perfection  of  the  saints  .  .  . 
till  we  all  meet  in  the  unity  of  faith,  and  of  the  know- 
ledge of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the 
measure  of  the  age  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.  That  we  may 
not  now  he  children,  tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried  aboict 
with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  in  the  wickedness  of  men 
and  in  their  craftiness  (Eph.  iv.)  Such  is  the  strong 
argument  which  S.  Paul  uses  to  prove  that  if  the 
ordinary  pastors  and  doctors  had  not  perpetual  suc- 
cession, and  were  liable  to  have  their  authority  abro- 
gated by  the  extraordinary,  we  should  also  have  but 
an  irregular  faith  and  discipline,  interrupted  at  every 
step ;  we  should  be  liable  to  be  seduced  by  men,  who 
on  every  occasion  would  boast  of  having  an  extraor- 
dinary vocation.  Thus,  like  the  Gentiles  we  should  walk 
(as  he  infers  afterwards)  in  the  vanity  of  our  mind 
(ibid.  17),  each  one  persuading  himself  that  he  felt  the 
movement  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  of  which  our  age  fur- 
nishes so  many  examples  that  this  is  one  of  the  strongest 
proofs  that  can  be  brought  forward  in  this  connection. 
For  if  the  extraordinary  may  take  away  the  ordinary 
ministration,  to  which  shall  we  give  the  guardianship 
of  it — to  Calvin  or  to  Luther,  to  Luther  or  to  Pacio- 
montanus,  to  Paciomontanus  or  to  Brandratus,  to  Bran- 
dratus  or  to  Brentius,  to  Brentius  or  to  the  Queen  of 
England  ? — for  each  will  draw  to  his  or  her  side  this 
pretext  of  extraordinary  mission. 

But  the  word  of  Our  Lord  frees  us  from  all  these 
difficulties,  who  has  built  his  Church  on  so  good  a 
foundation  and  in  such  wise  proportions  that  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  never  prevail  against  it.     And  if  they  have 

26  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  l 

never  prevailed  nor  shall  prevail,  then  the  extraor- 
dinary vocation  is  not  necessary  to  abolish  it,  for  God 
hateth  nothing  of  those  things  which  he  has  made  (Wis. 
xi.  25).  How  then  did  they  abolish  the  ordinary 
Church,  to  make  an  extraordinary  one,  since  it  is  he 
who  has  built  the  ordinary  one,  and  cemented  it  with 
his  own  blood  ? 



I  HAVE  not  been  able  hitherto  to  find  but  two  objec- 
tions amongst  your  masters  to  this  reasoning  which 
I  have  just  made,  one  of  which  is  taken  from  the 
example  of  Our  Lord  and  the  Apostles,  the  othei 
from  the  example  of  the  Prophets. 

And  as  to  the  first — tell  me,  I  pray,  do  you  think 
it  right  to  place  in  comparison  the  vocation  of  these 
new  ministers  and  that  of  Our  Lord  ?  Had  not  Our 
Lord  been  prophesied  as  the  Messias  ? — had  not  his 
time  been  determined  by  Daniel  ? — did  he  do  a  single 
action  which  had  not  been  described  almost  exactly  in 
the  books  of  the  Prophets,  and  prefigured  in  the 
Patriarchs  ?  He  changed  the  Mosaic  law  from  good 
into  better ; — but  had  not  this  change  been  predicted  ? 
He  consequently  changed  the  Aaronic  priesthood  into 
that  of  Melchisedech,  far  better :  is  not  all  this 
according  to  the  ancient  testimonies  ?     Your  ministers 

CHAP.  IV.]  Mission.  27 

have  not  been  prophesied  as  preachers  of  the  word  of 
God,  nor  the  time  of  their  coming,  nor  a  single  one  of 
their  actions.  They  have  made  a  revolution  in  the 
Church  much  greater  and  bolder  than  Our  Lord  made 
in  the  synagogue ;  for  they  have  taken  all  away,  only 
putting  back  certain  shadows :  but  testimonies  to  this 
effect  have  they  none.  At  any  rate  they  should  not 
elude  their  obligation  of  bringing  forward  miracles  in 
support  of  such  a  change,  whatever  pretext  you  may 
draw  from  the  Scriptures,  since  our  Lord  dispensed  not 
himself  from  this,  as  I  have  shown  above.  But  whence 
will  they  show  me  that  the  Church  was  ever  to 
receive  another  form,  or  a  like  reformation  to  the  one 
which  our  Lord  made  ? 

And  as  to  the  Prophets,  I  see  many  persons  under 
a  delusion.  It  is  supposed  that  all  the  vocations  of 
the  Prophets  were  extraordinary  and  immediate.  A 
false  idea  :  for  there  were  colleges  and  congreoations 
of  the  Prophets  approved  by  the  Synagogue,  as  may 
be  gathered  from  many  passages  of  the  Scriptures. 
There  were  such  in  Eamatha,  in  Bethel,  in  Jericho 
where  Eliseus  dwelt,  on  Mount  Ephraim,  in  Samaria ; 
Eliseus  himself  was  anointed  by  Heli;  the  vocation 
of  Samuel  was  recognised  and  approved  by  the  High 
Priest ;  and  with  Samuel  the  Lord  began  to  appear 
again  in  Silo,  as  says  the  Scripture  :  ^'''  whence  the 
Jews  regard  Samuel  as  the  founder  of  the  congrega- 
tions of  Prophets. 

It  is  supposed  that  all  those  who  prophesied  exer- 
cised the  office  of  preaching; — which  is  not  true,  as 
appears  from  what  occurred  with  the  officers  of  Saul 
and  with  Saul  himself :  t  in  such  sort  that  the  vocation 
*  I  Kings  iii.  21.  f  Ibid.  xix. 

2  8  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  l 

of  the  Prophets  has  no  bearing  on  that  of  heretics  or 
schismatics.  For  (i.)  it  was  either  ordinary,  as  we 
have  shown  above,  or  else  approved  by  the  remainder 
of  the  Synagogue,  as  is  easy  to  see  in  their  being 
immediately  recognised,  and  in  their  being  highly 
esteemed  everywhere  amongst  the  Jews,  who  called 
them  "  men  of  God : "  and  he  who  will  attentively 
examine  the  history  of  that  ancient  Synagogue  will 
see  that  the  office  of  priests  was  as  common  among 
them  as  that  of  preachers  amongst  us.  (2.)  Never 
can  be  pointed  out  Prophet  who  wished  to  overthrow 
the  ordinary  power ;  on  the  contrary,  all  followed  it, 
and  spoke  nothing  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  those 
who  sat  upon  the  chair  of  Moses  and  of  Aaron  ;  indeed, 
some  of  them  were  of  the  priestly  race,  as  Jeremias 
son  of  Helcias,  and  Ezechiel  son  of  Buzi.  They  have 
always  spoken  with  honour  of  the  priests  and  the 
sacerdotal  succession,  though  they  have  reprehended 
their  lives.  Isaias,  when  about  to  write  in  a  great 
book  which  was  shown  him,  took  Urias  the  priest, 
though  the  things  were  yet  to  come,  and  Zacharias  the 
prophet  as  witnesses,*  as  if  he  were  taking  the  testi- 
mony of  all  the  Priests  and  Prophets.  And  does  not 
Malachy  bear  witness  t  that  the  lijps  of  the  priest  shall 
keep  knowledge^  and  they  shall  seek  the  law  at  his  mouth : 
because  he  is  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  of  hosts  ? — so  far 
were  they  from  ever  having  withdrawn  the  Jews  from 
the  communion  of  the  Ordinary.  (3),  How  many 
miracles  did  the  Prophets  work  in  confirmation  of  the 
prophetic  vocation  ?  I  should  never  end  if  I  were  to 
enter  upon  the  computation  of  these :  but  at  such 
times  as  they  did  a  thing  which  had  an  appearance  of 
*  Isa.  viii.  i,  2.  +  ii.  7. 

CHAP.  IV.]  Mission.  29 

extraordinary  power,  immediately  miracles  followed. 
Witness  Elias,  who,  setting  up  an  altar  on  Mount 
Carmel  according  to  the  instinct  which  the  Holy 
Spirit  had  given  him,  and  offering  sacrifice,  showed  by 
miracle  that  he  did  it  to  the  honour  of  God  and  of  the 
Jewish  religion.  (4.)  And  finally,  it  would  well  be- 
come your  ministers  to  usurp  the  power  of  the 
Prophets — they  who  have  never  had  either  their  gift 
or  their  light !  It  should  rather  be  for  us  to  do  so ; — 
for  us,  who  could  bring  forward  an  infinity  of  Prophets 
on  our  side.  For  instance,  S.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus, 
on  the  authority  of  S.  Basil ;  S.  Anthony,  on  the  testi- 
mony of  Athanasius ;  the  Abbot  John,  on  the  testimony 
of  S.  Augustine  ;  S.  Benedict,  S.  Bernard,  S.  Francis, 
and  a  thousand  others.  If,  then,  there  is  question 
between  us  of  the  prophetic  authority,  this  is  on  our 
side,  be  it  ordinary  or  be  it  extraordinary,  since  we 
have  the  reality ;  not  with  your  ministers,  who  have 
never  given  the  shadow  of  a  proof  of  its  possession ; — 
unless  they  would  call  a  prophecy  Zwingle's  vision  in 
the  book  called  Suhsidium  de  Eucha7%stid,  and  the 
book  entitled  Querela  Luther ii,  or  the  prediction  he 
made  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  this  century  that  if 
he  preached  two  years  more  there  would  remain  no 
Pope,  nor  priests,  nor  monks,  nor  belfries,  nor  mass. 
Truly  there  is  but  one  defect  in  this  prophecy — ^just 
want  of  truth.  For  he  preached  nigh  twenty-two 
years  longer,  and  yet  there  are  still  found  priests  and 
belfries,  and  in  the  chair  of  Peter  sits  a  lawful  Pope. 

Your  first  ministers  then,  gentlemen,  are  of  the 
prophets  whom  God  forbade  to  be  heard,  in  Jeremias:* 
Hearken  not  to  the  words  of  the  projphets  that  prophesy 

*  xxiii. 

30  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

to  you  and  deceive  you :  they  speak  a  vision  of  their 
own  heart  and  not  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord.  .  .  . 
I  did  not  send  prophets,  yet  they  ran :  I  have  not  spoken 
to  them,  yet  they  prophesied.  .  .  .  I  have  heard  what  the 
frophets  said,  that  prophecy  lies  in  my  name,  and  say, 
I  have  dreamed^  I  have  dreamed.  Does  it  not  seem 
to  you  that  it  is  Zwingle  and  Luther,  with  their  pro- 
phecies and  visions  ?  that  it  is  Carlostadt,  with  his 
revelation  which  he  pretended  to  have  had  about 
the  Lord's  Supper,  and  which  gave  occasion  to  Luther 
to  write  his  book  Contra  scelestos  prophetas.  At  any 
rate  they  certainly  possess  this  property  of  not  having 
been  sent;  it  is  they  who  use  their  tongues,  and  say. 
The  Lord  saith  it.  For  they  can  never  prove  any  right 
to  the  office  which  they  usurp ;  they  can  never  produce 
any  legitimate  vocation.  And  how  then  shall  they 
preach  ?  One  cannot  enrol  oneself  under  any  captain 
without  the  approval  of  one's  prince:  how  then  were 
you  so  ready  to  engage  yourselves  under  the  command 
of  these  first  ministers,  without  the  permission  of  your 
ordinary  pastors,  and  so  far  as  to  leave  the  state  in 
which  you  were  born  and  bred,  which  is  the  Catholic 
Church  ?  They  are  guilty  of  having  made  this  dis- 
turbance by  their  own  authority,  and  you  of  having 
followed  them,  in  which  you  are  inexcusable.  The 
good  little  Samuel,  humble,  gentle,  and  ho]y,  having 
been  called  thrice  by  God,  thought  all  the  time  that 
it  was  Heli  who  was  calling  him,  and  only  at  the 
fourth  time  addressed  himself  to  God  as  to  the  one 
calling  him.  It  has  seemed  to  your  ministers  that 
God  has  thrice  called  them,  ( i .)  by  peoples  and  magis- 
trates ;  (2.)  by  our  bishops ;  (3.)  by  his  extraordinary 
voice.     No,  no !     Let  them   not   bring   this  forward, 

CHAP.  IV.]  Mission.  31 

that  Samuel  was  called  thrice  by  God,  and  in  his 
humility  thought  it  was  a  call  by  man,  until,  instructed 
by  Heli,  he  knew  that  it  was  the  divine  voice.  Your 
ministers,  gentlemen,  allege  three  vocations  of  God, 
by  secular  magistrates,  by  the  bishops,  and  by  his  ex- 
traordinary voice.  They  think  that  it  is  God  who  has 
called  them  in  those  three  ways :  but  you  do  not  find 
that  when  they  are  instructed  by  the  Church  they  ac- 
knowledsje  that  theirs  is  a  vocation  of  man,  and  that 
their  ears  have  tingled  to  the  old  Adam ;  by  no  means 
do  they  submit  the  question  to  him  who,  as  Heli  did, 
now  presides  in  the  Church. 

Such  then  is  the  first  reason  which  makes  your 
ministers  and  you  also  inexcusable,  though  unequally 
so,  before  God  and  men  in  having  left  the  Church. 

On  the  contrary,  gentlemen,  the  Church,  who  con- 
tradicted and  opposed  your  first  ministers,  and  still 
opposes  those  of  the  present  day,  is  so  clearly  marked 
on  all  sides  that  no  one,  blind  as  he  may  be,  can  pre- 
tend that  his  is  a  case  of  ignorance  of  the  duty  which 
all  good  Christians  owe  her,  or  that  she  is  not  the  true, 
sole,  inseparable,  and  dearest  Spouse  of  the  heavenly 
King,  which  makes  the  separation  from  her  all  the 
more  inexcusable.  For,  to  leave  the  Church  and  dis- 
regard her  commands  is  evermore  to  become  a  heathen 
and  a  publican,  let  it  be  at  the  persuasion  of  an 
angel  or  a  seraph.  But,  at  the  persuasion  of  men 
who  were  sinners  on  the  largest  scale  against  other 
private  persons,  who  were  without  authority,  without 
approval,  without  any  quality  required  in  preachers 
or  prophets  save  the  mere  knowledge  of  certain 
sciences,  to  break  all  the  ties  of  the  most  religious 
obligation  of  obedience  which  is  in  the  world,  namely, 

32  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

that  which  is  owing  to  the  Church  as  Spouse  of  our 
Lord ! — this  is  a  fault  which  cannot  be  covered  save 
by  a  great  repentance  and  penitence — to  which  I 
invite  you  on  the  part  of  the  living  God. 



Our  adversaries,  clearly  perceiving  that  by  this  touch- 
stone their  doctrine  would  be  recognised  as  of  base 
gold,  try  by  all  means  to  turn  us  from  that  invincible 
proof  which  we  find  in  the  marks  of  the  true  Church. 
And  therefore  they  would  maintain  that  the  Church  is 
invisible  and  unperceivable.  I  consider  that  this  is 
the  extreme  of  absurdity,  and  that  immediately  be- 
yond this  abide  frenzy  and  madness.  I  speak  of  the 
militant  Church  of  which  the  Scripture  has  left  us 
testimony,  not  of  that  which  men  put  forward.  Now, 
in  all  the  Scripture  it  will  never  be  found  that  the 
Church  is  taken  for  an  invisible  assembly.  Here  are 
our  reasons. 

(i.)  Our  Lord  and  Master  sends  us  to  the  Church  in 
our  difficulties  and  variances  (Matt,  xviii.  i6,  17). 
S.  Paul  teaches  how  we  ought  to  'behave  in  it  ( i  Tim. 
iii.  15);  he  called  together  the  ancients  of  the  Church 
militant  (Acts  xx.  17)  ;  he  shows  them  that  they  are 
'placed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  (ibid.  28)  ;  he  is  sent  by  the 

CHAP,  v.]  Mission,  33 

Churchy  with  S.  Barnabas  (ibid.  xiii.  1,3);  he  is  received 
hy  the  Church  (ibid.  xv.  4) ;  he  confirmed  the  Churches 
(ibid.  41);  he  ordained  for  them  'priests  in  every  Ghwrch 
(ibid.  xiv.  22);  he  assembled  the  Church  (ibid.  26) ;  he 
saluted  the  Church  at  Csesarea  (ibid,  xviii.  22)  ;  he  per- 
sectUed  the  Church  (Gal.  i.  13).  How  can  all  this  be 
understood  of  an  invisible  Church  ?  Where  should 
one  seek  it  to  lay  complaints  before  it,  to  converse 
in  it,  to  rule  it  ?  When  it  sent  S.  Paul,  and  received 
him,  when  he  confirmed  it,  ordained  priests  in  it, 
assembled  it,  saluted  it,  persecuted  it — was  this  in 
figure  or  in  faith  only,  and  in  spirit  ?  I  am  sure  that 
everybody  must  see  that  these  were  visible  and  per- 
ceptible acts  on  both  sides.  And  when  he  wrote  to  it, 
did  he  address  himself  to  some  invisible  chimera  ? 

(2.)  What  will  be  said  about  the  Prophets,  who 
represent  the  Church  to  us  as  not  only  visible,  but 
quite  distinct,  illustrious,  manifest,  magnificent  ?  They 
depict  it  as  a  queen  in  golden  borders  clothed  round 
ahout  with  varieties  (Ps.  xliv.  14,  I5)>  s-s  a  mountain 
(Isa.  ii.  2)  ;  as  a  sicn  (Ps.  Ixxxviii.)  ;  as  a  full  moon  ; 
as  the  rainbow,  a  faithful  and  certain  witness  of  the 
favour  of  God  towards  men,  who  are  all  of  the  pos- 
terity of  Noe  :  such  is  the  signification  of  this  Psalm 
in  our  version :  Ut  thronus  ejus  sicut  sol  in  conspectu 
meOj  et  sicut  luna  jperfecta  in  wternum  et  testis  in  coelo 

(3.)  The  Scripture  everywhere  testifies  that  she  can 
be  seen  and  known,  yea,  that  she  is  known.  Solomon, 
in  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  (vi.),  speaking  of  the 
Church, — does  he  not  say  that  the  daughters  saw  her 
and  declared  her  most  blessed  ?  and  then  introducing 
the  daughters,  full  of  admiration  he  makes  them  say : 

TII.  C 

34  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  l 

Who  is  she  that  cometh  forth  as  the  mo7^ning  rising^ 
fair  as  the  moon,  hright  as  the  sun,  terrible  as  an  army 
set  in  array  ?  Is  this  not  to  declare  her  visible  ? 
And  when  he  makes  them  call  upon  her  thus :  Bet^trn, 
return,  0  Sulamitess ;  return,  return,  that  we  may 
hehold  thee  ;  and  makes  her  answer :  What  shalt  thou 
see  in  the  Sulamitess  hut  the  companies  of  camps  ? — is 
not  this  again  to  declare  her  visible  ?  If  one  regard 
those  admirable  Canticles  and  pastoral  representations 
of  the  loves  of  the  celestial  Bridegroom  with  the 
Church,  one  will  see  that  she  is  throughout  most 
visible  and  prominent.  Isaias  speaks  of  her  thus 
(xxxv.  8) :  This  shall  be  unto  you  a  straight  way,  so 
that  fools  shall  not  err  therein  ; — must  she  not  be  dis- 
played and  easy  to  see,  since  even  the  simplest  shall 
be  able  to  guide  themselves  by  her  without  fail  ? 

(4.)  The  pastors  and  doctors  of  the  Church  are 
visible,  therefore  the  Church  is  visible.  For,  I  ask 
you,  are  not  the  pastors  of  the  Church  a  part  of  the 
Church,  and  must  not  pastor  and  sheep  know  each 
other,  must  not  the  sheep  hear  the  shepherd's  voice 
and  follow  him,  must  not  the  good  shepherd  go  seek 
his  sheep  that  is  lost,  and  recognise  his  enclosure  and 
fold  ?  They  would  indeed  be  a  fine  sort  of  shepherd, 
who  could  not  know  or  see  his  flock.  I  know  not 
whether  I  am  to  prove  that  the  pastors  of  the  Church 
are  visible ;  things  as  evident  are  denied.  S.  Peter 
was  a  pastor,  I  suppose,  since  Our  Lord  said  to  him, 
Feed  my  sheep  ;  so  were  the  Apostles,  and  they  were 
seen.  I  suppose  that  those  to  whom  S.  Paul  said, 
Take  heed  to  yowselves  and  to  all  the  flock,  over  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  hath  placed  you,  to  ride  the  Church  of 
God; — I   suppose,   say   I,   that   they   saw   him;    and 

CHAP,  v.]  Mission,  35 

when  like  good  children  they  fell  upon  the  neck  of 
this  good  shepherd,  bathing  his  face  with  their  tears, 
I  presume  that  he  touched,  and  felt,  and  saw  them ; 
and  what  makes  me  still  more  sure  of  it  is  that  they 
were  chiefly  grieved  at  his  departure  for  the  word 
which  he  had  said  that  they  should  see  his  face  no  more. 
And  then,  Zwingle,  QEcolampadius,  Luther,  Calvin, 
Beza  and  Musculus  are  visible;  and  as  to  the  two 
last  many  of  you  have  seen  them,  and  yet  they  are 
called  pastors  by  their  disciples.  The  pastors  then 
are  seen,  and  consequently  the  sheep  also. 

(5.)  It  is  the  property  of  the  Church  to  carry  on 
the  true  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God,  the  true  adminis- 
tration of  the  Sacraments, — and  is  not  all  this  visible  ? 
How  then  would  you  have  their  subject  invisible  ? 

(6.)  Do  we  not  know  that  the  twelve  patriarchs, 
the  children  of  the  good  Jacob,  were  the  living  spring 
of  the  Church  of  Israel  ?  And  when  their  father  had 
assembled  them  to  bless  them,  they  were  seen  and 
saw  one  another.  Why  do.  I  delay  on  this  ?  All 
sacred  history  testifies  that  the  ancient  synagogue  was 
visible,  and  why  not  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

(7.)  As  the  patriarchs,  fathers  of  the  synagogue  of 
Israel,  of  ivhom  was  Christ  according  to  the  flesh  (Eom. 
ix.  5),  formed  the  visible  Church,  so  the  Apostles  with 
their  disciples,  children  of  the  synagogue  according  to 
the  flesh  and  spirit,  gave  beginning  to  the  Catholic 
Church  visibly,  as  the  Psalmist  says  (xliv.  17):  In- 
stead of  thy  father,  sons  are  horn  to  thee ;  thou  shalt 
make  them  princes  over  all  the  earth. 

For  twelve  patriarchs  are  born  to  thee  twelve 
Apostles,    says     Arnobius.*       Those    Apostles    being 

*  Arnobii  (Jiinioris),  Conim.  in  Ps.  xliv. 

36  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  1. 

gathered  together  in  Jerusalem  with  the  little  com- 
pany of  the  disciples  and  the  most  glorious  Mother  of 
the  Saviour  formed  the  true  Church, — and  of  what 
kind  ?  Visible  without  doubt,  yea  so  visible  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  came  to  water  these  holy  plants  and  seed- 
plots  of  Christianity. 

(8.)  How  did  the  ancient  Jews  begin  their  course 
as  the  people  of  God  ?  By  circumcision,  a  visible 
sign ; — and  we  by  baptism,  a  visible  sign.  By  whom 
were  those  of  old  governed  ?  By  the  priests  of  the 
race  of  Aaron,  visible  men; — we  by  the  bishops, 
visible  men.  By  whom  were  the  ancients  taught  ? 
By  the  prophets  and  doctors,  visibly ; — we  by  our 
pastors  and  preachers,  visibly.  What  religious  and 
sacred  food  had  the  ancients  to  eat  ?  The  paschal 
lamb,  the  manna,  it  is  all  visible ; — we  have  the  most 
holy  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  a  visible  sign  though 
of  an  invisible  thing.  By  whom  was  the  synagogue 
persecuted  ?  By  the  Egyptians,  Babylonians,  Madian- 
ites,  Philistines,  all  visible  nations : — the  Church  by 
the  Pagans,  Turks,  Moors,  Saracens,  heretics ; — all  is 
visible.  Goodness  of  God ! — and  we  are  still  to  ask 
whether  the  Church  is  visible  !  But  what  is  the 
Church  ?  An  assembly  of  men  who  have  flesh  and 
bones ; — and  are  we  to  say  that  it  is  but  a  spirit 
or  phantom,  which  seems  to  be  visible  and  is  so  only 
by  illusion  ?  No,  no ;  Why  are  you  trouUed^  and 
why  do  thoughts  arise  in  your  hearts  ?  See  her  hands ; 
behold  her  ministers,  officers,  and  governors :  see  her 
feet;  look  at  her  preachers  how  they  carry  her  east 
and  west,  north  and  south.  All  are  flesh  and  bones. 
Feel  her  ;  come  as  humble  children  to  throw  yourselves 
into  the  bosom  of  this  sweet  mother.     Consider  her 

CHAP.  VI.]  Mission.  37 

throughout  her  whole  body,  entirely  beautiful  as  she 
is,  and  you  will  see  that  she  is  visible ;  for  a  spiritual 
and  invisible  thing  liath  not  flesh  and  bories,  as  yoto  see 
her  to  have  (Luke  ult.) 



Such  are  our  reasons,  sound  under  every  test.  But 
they  have  some  counter-reasons,  which,  as  they  fancy, 
they  draw  from  the  Scriptures,  but  which  are  very 
easy  of  refutation  to  any  one  who  will  consider  what 

( I .)  Our  Lord  had  in  his  humanity  two  parts,  body 
and  soul ;  so  the  Church  his  spouse  has  two  parts, 
the  one  interior,  which  is  as  her  soul,  invisible — Faith, 
Hope,  Charity,  Grace, — the  other  exterior,  as  her  body, 
and  visible — the  Confession  of  Faith,  Praises  and 
Canticles,  Preaching,  Sacraments,  Sacrifices.  Yea,  all 
that  is  done  in  the  Church  has  its  exterior  and  inte- 
rior. Prayer  is  interior  and  exterior ;  Faith  fills  the 
heart  with  assurance  and  the  mouth  with  confession ; 
Preaching  is  made  exteriorly  by  men,  but  the  secret 
light  of  the  Heavenly  Father  is  required  in  it,  for  we 
must  always  hear  him  and  learn  from  him  before 
coming  to  the  Son ;  and  as  to  the  Sacraments,  the 
sign  is  exterior  but  the  grace  is  interior,  as  every  one 
knows.  Thus  then  we  have  the  interior  of  the  Church 
and  the  exterior.     Its  greatest  beauty  is  within,  the 

3^  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

outside  is  not  so  excellent,  as  says  the  Spouse  in  the 
Canticles  (iv.) :  Thij  eyes  are  doves'  eyes  besides  what  is 
hid  within.  .  .  .  Honey  and  milk  are  under  thy  tongue, 
that  is,  in  thy  heart ; — behold  the  interior.  A7id  the 
smell  of  thy  garments  as  the  odour  of  frankincense  ; — 
behold  the  exterior  service.  And  the  Psalmist  (xliv.)  : 
All  the  glory  of  the  King*s  daughter  is  within ; — there 
is  the  interior.  Clothed  round  in  golden  borders  with 
varieties; — there  is  the  exterior. 

(2.)  We  must  consider  that  as  well  the  interior  as 
the  exterior  of  the  Church  may  be  called  spiritual, 
but  differently.  For  the  interior  is  spiritual  purely 
and  of  its  own  nature ;  the  exterior  of  its  own  nature 
is  corporal,  but  because  it  has  a  reference  and  tendency 
to  the  spiritual,  the  interior,  we  call  it  spiritual,  as  S. 
Paul  calls  those  who  made  the  flesh  subject  to  the 
spirit,  although  they  were  corporeal ;  and  although  each 
person  be  particular,  of  his  own  nature,  still  when  he 
serves  the  public  he  is  called  a  public  man.  Now,  if 
one  say  that  the  Evangelical  law  was  given  on 
the  hearts  interiorly,  not  on  tables  of  stone  exteriorly, 
as  Jeremias  says  (xxxi.  33),  the  answer  is ;  that  in  the 
interior  of  the  Church  and  in  its  heart  is  all  the  chief 
of  its  glory,  but  this  fails  not  to  shine  out  over  the 
exterior,  by  which  it  is  known  and  recognised.  So 
when  it  is  said  in  the  Gospel  (John  iv.  23)  that  the 
hour  cometh,  and  oioiu  is,  when  the  true  adorer  shall  adore 
the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth; — we  are  taught  that 
the  interior  is  the  chief  thing,  and  that  the  exterior 
is  vain  if  it  do  not  tend  and  flow  towards  the  interior 
to  spiritualise  itself  therein.  In  the  same  way,  when 
S.  Peter  calls  the  Church  a  spiritual  house  ( i  Pet.  ii.  5 ), 
it  is  because  all  that  proceeds  from  the  Church  tends 

CHAP.  VI.]  Mission.  39 

to  the  spiritual  life,  and  because  its  greatest  glory  is  in- 
terior ;  or  again  because  it  is  not  a  house  made  with 
lime  and  sand,  but  a  mystical  house  of  living  stones, 
to  which  charity  serves  as  cement.  The  holy  Word 
says  (Luke  xvii.  20),  The  kingdom  of  God  cometh  not 
with  observation :  but  the  kingdom  of  God  is  the 
Church,  therefore  the  Church  is  not  visible  ; — answer : 
the  kingdom  of  God  in  this  place  is  Our  Lord  with 
his  grace,  or,  if  you  will,  the  company  of  Our  Lord 
while  he  was  in  this  world ;  whence  it  continues :  for 
behold  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you;  and  this 
kingdom  did  not  come  with  the  surroundings  and 
glory  of  a  worldly  magnificence,  as  the  Jews  expected; 
besides,  as  we  have  said,  the  fairest  jewel  of  this 
King's  daughter  is  hidden  within,  and  cannot  be  seen. 
As  to  what  S.  Paul  says  to  the  Hebrews  (xii.  18), 
that  we  are  not  come  to  the  mountain  that  might  be 
handled,  like  Mount  Sina,  but  to  the  heavenly  Jerusalem 
— he  is  not  proposing  to  show  that  the  Church  is 
invisible  :  for  S.  Paul  shows  in  this  place  that  the 
Church  is  more  magnificent  and  richly  endowed  than 
the  Synagogue,  and  that  she  is  not  a  natural  moun- 
tain like  that  of  Sina,  but  a  mystical ;  from  which  it 
does  not  follow  that  it  is  in  any  way  invisible.  In- 
deed, it  may  reasonably  be  said  that  he  is  actually 
speaking  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  that  is,  the 
triumphant  Church  ;  wherefore  he  adds  the  comjpany  of 
angels,  as  if  to  say  that  in  the  Old  Law  God  was 
seen  on  the  mountain  after  a  terrible  manner,  and 
that  the  New  leads  us  to  see  him  in  his  glory  there 
in  Paradise  above. 

Finally,   here   is    the    argument   which   everybody 
loudly  asserts  to  be  the   strongest, — /  believe  in  the 

40  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  l 

Holy  Catholic  Church :  if  I  believe  in  it,  I  do  not  see 
it,  therefore  it  is  invisible.  Is  there  anything  feebler 
in  the  world  than  this  phantom  of  a  reason  ?  Did 
the  Apostles  not  believe  that  Our  Lord  was  risen 
again,  and  did  they  not  see  him  ?  Because  thou  hast 
seen  me,  he  says  himself  to  S.  Thomas  (John  xx.  27): 
tkou  hast  believed  ;  and  to  make  him  believing  he  says 
to  him,  See  my  hands,  and  bring  hither  thy  hand^ 
and  jput  it  into  my  side,  and  he  not  faithless  hut  he- 
lieving.  See  how  sight  hinders  not  faith  but  pro- 
duces it.  Now  Thomas  saw  one  thing  and  believed 
another ;  he  saw  the  body  and  he  believed  the  spirit 
and  the  divinity ;  for  it  was  not  his  seeing  which  led 
him  to  say,  My  Lord  and  ray  God  ! — but  his  faith. 
So  do  we  believe  one  Baptism  for  the  remission  of 
sins ;  we  see  the  Baptism,  but  not  the  remission  of 
sins.  Similarly,  we  see  the  Church,  but  not  its  in- 
terior sanctity  ;  we  see  its  eyes  as  of  a  dove,  but  we- 
believe  what  is  hidden  within :  we  see  its  richly 
broidered  garments,  in  beautiful  variety,  with  golden 
borders,  but  the  brightest  splendour  of  its  glory  is 
within,  which  we  believe.  In  this  royal  Spouse  there 
is  wherewith  to  feed  the  interior  and  the  exterior  eye, 
faith  and  sense,  and  all  for  the  greater  glory  of  her 

CHAP  VII.]  Mission,  41 



To  prove  the  invisibility  of  the  Church  each  one 
brings  forward  his  reason  ;  but  the  most  feeble  of  all 
is  that  derived  from  eternal  predestination.  Certainly 
it  is  with  no  little  artfulness  that  they  turn  the  spiritual 
eyes  of  the  militant  Church  upon  eternal  predestina- 
tion, in  order  that,  dazzled  by  the  lightnings  of  this 
inscrutable  mystery,  we  may  not  perceive  what  lies 
before  us.  They  say  that  there  are  two  Churches, 
one  visible  and  imperfect,  the  other  invisible  and  per- 
fect, and  that  the  visible  can  err  and  can  be  blown 
away  by  the  wind  of  errors  and  idolatries,  the  invisible 
not.  And  if  one  ask  what  is  the  visible  Church,  they 
answer  that  it  is  the  assemblage  of  those  persons  who 
profess  the  same  faith  and  sacraments,  which  contains 
bad  and  good,  and  is  a  Church  only  in  name ;  and 
that  the  invisible  Church  is  that  which  contains  only 
the  elect,  who  are  not  in  the  knowledge  of  men,  but 
are  only  recognised  and  seen  by  God. 

But  we  will  clearly  show  that  the  true  Church  con- 
tains the  good  and  the  bad,  the  reprobate  and  the  elect ; 
— and  here  are  the  proofs. 

(i.)  Was  not  that  the  true  Church  wliich  S.  Paul 
called  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth  and  the  house  of 
the  living  God  (i  Tim.  iii.  15)?  Certainly; — for  to 
be  a  pillar  of  truth  cannot  appertain  to  an  erring  and 
straying  Church.  Now  the  Apostle  witnesses  of  this 
true  Church,  the  house  of  God,  that  there  are  in  it 

42  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

vessels  unto  honour  and  unto  dishonour  (2  Tim.  ii.  20,) 
that  is,  good  and  bad. 

(2.)  Is  not  that  Church  against  which  the  gates  of 
hell  shall  not  prevail  (Matt.  xvi.  18)  the  true  Church  ? 
Nevertheless  there  are  therein  men  who  have  to  be 
loosed  from  their  sins,  and  others  whose  sins  have  to 
be  retained,  as  Our  Lord  shows  us  in  the  promise  and 
the  power  he  gave  to  S.  Peter  in  this  matter.  Those 
whose  sins  are  retained — are  they  not  wicked  and 
reprobate  ?  Indeed,  the  reprobate  are  precisely  those 
whose  sins  are  retained,  and  by  the  elect  we  ordinarily 
mean  those  whose  sins  are  pardoned.  Now,  that  those 
whose  sins  S.  Peter  had  power  to  forgive  or  to  retain 
were  in  the  Church  is  evident ;  for  them  that  are  outside 
the  Church  only  God  will  judge  (i  Cor.  v.  13).  Those 
therefore  of  whom  S.  Peter  was  to  judge  were  not 
outside  the  Church  but  within,  though  amongst  them 
there  were  some  reprobate. 

(3.)  And  does  not  Our  Lord  teach  us  that  when  we 
are  offended  by  some  one  of  our  brethren,  after  having 
reprehended  and  corrected  him  twice,  in  two  different 
fashions,  we  should  take  him  to  the  Church  ?  Tell  the 
Cliurch  ;  and  if  he  will  not  hear  the  Church  let  him  he 
to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  the  publican  (Matt,  xviii.  17). 
Here  one  cannot  escape — the  consequence  is  inevi- 
table. There  is  question  of  one  of  our  bretliren  who 
is  neither  heathen  nor  publican,  but  under  the  disci- 
pline and  correction  of  the  Church,  and  consequently 
member  of  the  Church,  and  yet  there  is  no  inconsis- 
tency in  his  being  reprobate,  perverse,  and  obstinate. 
Not  only  then  do  the  good  belong  to  the  true  Church, 
but  the  wicked  also,  until  such  time  as  they  are  cast  out 
from  it,  unless  one  would  say  that  the  Church  to  which 

CHAP,  vil]  Mission,  4 


Our  Lord  sends  us  is  an  erring,  sinful,  and  antichristian 
Church.     This  would  be  too  open  a  blasphemy. 

(4.)  When  Our  Lord  says/"'  The  servant  ahideth 
not  in  the  house  for  ever ;  but  the  Son  ahideth  for  ever 
(John  viii.  35) ; — is  it  not  the  same  as  if  he  said  that 
in  the  house  of  the  Church  the  elect  and  the  reprobate 
are  for  a  time  ?  Wlio  can  this  servant  be  who  abide th 
not  in  the  house  for  ever  except  the  one  who  shall  he 
cast  into  exterior  darkness.  And  in  fact  Christ  clearly 
shows  that  he  so  understands  it  when  he  says  immedi- 
ately before,  Whosoever  committeth  sin  is  the  servant 
of  sin.  Now  this  man,  though  he  abide  not  for  ever,  yet 
abideth  during  such  time  as  he  is  required  for  service. 
S.  Paul  writes  to  the  Church  of  God  which  was  at 
Corinth  (i  Cor.  i.  2),  and  yet  he  wishes  them  to  drive 
out  a  certain  incestuous  man  (ibid,  v.)  If  he  be  driven 
out  he  was  there,  and  if  he  were  there  and  the  Church 
were  the  assemblage  of  the  elect,  how  could  they  drive 
him  out  ?     The  elect  cannot  be  reprobate. 

But  why  may  we  not  lay  down  that  the  reprobate 
and  wicked  are  of  the  true  Church,  when  they  can 
even  be  pastors  and  bishops  therein  ?  That  is  cer- 
tain :    is    not    Judas    reprobate  ?     And    yet    he    was 

*  In  a  detached  note  elsewhere  the  Saint  draws  special  attention  to 
the  force  of  this  text.  "From  this,"  he  says,  "it  is  conclusively 
shown  that  there  are  sinners  in  the  Church."  And  he  proceeds  to 
give  an  argument  from  the  utility  of  their  presence.  "Those  pas- 
sages of  the  Psalm  (cxviii.).  Thou  hast  made  me  wise  over  my  enemies, 
then,  over  all  my  teachers,  then,  over  ancients,  &c.,  prove  that  we  can 
gain  excellent  knowledge  and  profit  from  our  enemies.  For,  by  over 
{super),  in  the  expression  over  my  enemies,  may  be  understood,  says 
Genebrard,  by  occasion  of  my  enemies,  from  or  out  of  my  enemies.  And 
since  the  being  made  wise  by  means  of  enemies  is  put  before  the  being 
made  wise  by  means  of  elders  or  teachers,  it  rightly  follows  that  we 
have  richer  sources  of  knowledge  in  the  school  of  enemies  than  in  that 
of  teachers,"  &c. 

44  T^h^  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  l 

Apostle  and  bishop ;  according  to  the  Psalmist  (cviii.  8), 
and  according  to  S.  Peter  (Acts  i.  17),  who  says  that 
he  had  obtained  part  of  the  ministry  of  the  apostolate, 
and  according  to  the  whole  Gospel,  which  ever  places 
him  in  the  number  of  the  college  of  the  Apostles. 
Was  not  Nicholas  of  Antioch  a  deacon  like  S.  Stephen  ? 
— and  yet  many  ancient  Fathers  make  no  difficulty 
on  that  account  of  considering  him  an  heresiarch ; 
witness,  amongst  others,  Epiphanius,  Philostratus, 
Jerome.  And  in  fact  the  Nicolaites  took  occasion 
from  him  to  recommend  their  abominations,  of  whom 
S.  John  makes  mention  in  the  Apocalypse  (ii.  6),  as 
of  real  heretics.  S.  Paul  declares  to  the  priests  of 
Ephesus  that  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  them  bishops 
to  ride  the  Church  of  God  (Acts  xx.  28),  but  he  assures 
them  also  that  some  of  their  ow)i  selves  vjould  rise  up 
speaking  perverse  things,  to  draw  aiuay  disciples  after 
them.  He  speaks  to  all  when  he  says  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  has  made  them  bishops,  and  speaks  of  those 
very  same  persons  when  he  says  that  from  amongst 
them  shall  schismatics  arise.  But  when  should  I  have 
finished  if  I  would  here  heap  up  the  names  of  all 
those  bishops  and  prelates  who,  after  having  been 
lawfully  placed  in  this  office  and  dignity,  have  fallen 
from  their  first  grace  and  have  died  heretics.  Who, 
for  a  simple  priest,  ever  said  anything  so  holy,  so  wise, 
so  chaste,  so  charitable  as  Origen  ?  No  one  could 
read  what  is  written  of  him  by  Vincent  of  Lerins,  one 
of  the  most  judicious  and  learned  of  Church  writers, 
no  one  could  ponder  over  his  accursed  old  age,  after  a 
life  so  admirable  and  holy,  without  being  filled  with 
compassion,  to  see  this  grand  and  brave  pilot, — after  so 
many  storms  weathered,  after  so  many  and  such  lucra- 

CHAP.  VII.]  Mission.  45 

tive  voyages  to  Hebrews,  Arabs,  Chaldseans,  Greeks,  and 
Latins, — on  his  return,  full  of  honour  and  of  spiritual 
riches,  suffer  shipwreck  and  perish  in  port,  on  the  edge 
of  the  tomb !  Who  would  dare  to  say  that  he  had 
not  been  of  the  true  Church,  he  who  had  always 
fought  for  the  Church,  and  whom  the  whole  Church 
honoured  and  held  as  one  of  its  grandest  Doctors  ? 
And  yet  behold  him  at  last  a  heretic,  excommunicate 
outside  the  Ark,  perishing  in  the  deluge  of  his  own 
conceit !  All  this  corresponds  with  the  holy  word  of 
Our  Lord  (Matt,  xxiii.  2),  who  considered  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  as  the  true  pastors  of  the  true  Church 
of  that  time,  since  he  commands  that  they  should  be 
obeyed,  and  yet  considered  them  not  as  elect  but 
rather  as  reprobate.  Now  what  an  absurdity  would 
it  be,  I  ask  you,  if  the  elect  alone  were  of  the  Church  ? 
That  would  follow  which  is  said  of  the  Donatists,  that 
we  could  not  know  our  prelates,  and  consequently 
could  not  pay  them  obedience.  For  how  should  we 
know  whether  those  who  were  called  prelates  and 
pastors  were  of  the  Church,  since  we  cannot  know  who 
of  the  living  is  predestinate  and  who  is  not,  as  will  be 
said  elsewhere  ? — and  if  they  are  not  of  the  Church, 
how  can  they  hold  the  place  of  elect  there  ?  It  would 
indeed  be  one  of  the  strangest  monsters  that  could  be 
seen — if  the  head  of  the  Church  were  not  of  the 
Church.  Not  only  then  can  one  who  is  reprobate  be 
of  the  Church  but  even  pastor  in  the  Church.  The 
Church  then  cannot  be  called  invisible  on  the  ground 
that  it  is  composed  of  the  predestinate  alone. 

I  conclude  all  this  discourse  by  the  Gospel  com- 
parisons which  show  this  truth  clearly  and  completely. 

S.  John  likens  the  Church  to  the  threshing-floor  of 

46  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

a  farm,  on  which  is  not  only  tlie  wheat  for  the  barn, 
but  also  the  chaff  to  be  burnt  with  unquenchable  fire 
(Matt.  iii.  1 2) ;  are  these  not  the  elect  and  the  repro- 
bate ?  Our  Lord  compares  it  to  a  net  cast  into  the  sea, 
and  gathering  together  of  all  kind  of  fishes,  good  and 
bad  (ibid.  xiii.  47) ;  to  ten  virgins,  five  of  them  foolish 
and  five  wise  (ibid.  xxv.  2);  to  three  servants,  one  of 
whom  is  slothfid,  and  therefore  cast  into  the  exterior 
darkness  (ibid.  14);  finally,  to  a  marriage-feast,  unto 
which  have  entered  both  good  and  bad,  and  the  bad, 
not  having  on  the  nuptial  garment,  are  cast  into 
exterior  darkness  (ibid,  xxii.)  Are  not  all  these  as 
many  sufficient  proofs  that  not  only  the  elect  but  also 
the  reprobate  are  in  the  Church  ?  "We  must  therefore 
close  the  door  of  our  judgment  to  all  sorts  of  notions 
of  this  kind,  and  to  this  one  amongst  them,  by  means 
of  that  never-enough-pondered  proposition :  Many  are 
called,  hut  few  are  chosen  (ibid.)  All  those  who  are 
in  the  Church  are  called,  ]>ut  all  who  are  therein  are 
not  elect;  and  indeed  Church  does  not  mean  election 
but  convocation. 



Where  will  they  find  the  Scripture  passage  which 
can  furnish  them  any  excuse  for  so  many  absur- 
dities, and  against  proofs  so  clear  as  those  we  have 
given  ?     Yet  counter-reasons  are  not  wanting  in  this 

CHAP.  VIII.]  Mission,  47 

matter :  never  does  obstinacy  leave  its  followers  with- 
out them. 

Will  they  then  bring  forward  what  is  written  in 
the  Canticles  (iv.)  concerning  the  Spouse ;  how  she  is 
a  garden  enclosed,  a  fountain  or  spring  sealed  up,  a 
luell  of  living  waters,  how  she  is  all  fair  and  there  is 
not  a  spot  in  her;  or,  as  the  Apostle  says,  how  she 
is  glorious,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  holy,  without 
blemish  (Eph.  v.  27)  ?  I  earnestly  beg  them  to  consider 
the  conclusion  they  wish  to  draw,  namely,  that  there 
can  be  in  the  Church  none  but  saints,  immaculate, 
faultless,  glorious.  I  will,  with  the  same  passages, 
show  them  that  in  the  Cliurch  there  are  neither 
elect  nor  reprobate.  For  is  it  not  the  humble  but 
truthful  saying,  as  the  great  Council  of  Trent  declares, 
of  all  the  just  and  elect,  Forgive  us  our  trespasses,  as 
vje  forgive  them  that  tresimss  against  us.  I  suppose 
S.  James  was  elect,  and  yet  he  confesses  (iii.  2), 
In  many  things  vje  all  offend.  S.  John  closes  our 
mouth  and  the  mouth  of  all  the  elect,  so  that  no  one 
may  boast  of  being  without  sin ;  on  the  contrary,  he 
will  have  each  one  know  and  confess  that  he  sins 
(i  John  i.)  I  believe  that  David  in  his  rapture  and 
ecstasy  knew  what  the  elect  are,  and  yet  he  considered 
every  man  to  be  a  liar  (Ps.  cxv.  11).  If  then  these 
holy  qualities  given  to  the  Spouse,  the  Church,  are 
to  be  taken  precisely,  and  if  there  is  to  be  no  spot  or 
wrinkle  anywhere  in  it,  we  must  go  out  of  this  world 
to  iind  the  verification  of  these  fair  titles,  the  elect 
of  this  world  will  not  be  able  to  claim  them.  Let  us 
then  make  the  truth  clear. 

(i.)  The  Church  as  a  whole  is  entirely  fair,  holy, 
glorious,  both  as  to  morals  and  as  to  doctrine.     Morals 

48  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  l 

depend  on  the  will,  doctrine  on  the  understanding. 
Into  the  understanding  of  the  Church  there  never 
entered  falseness,  nor  wickedness  into  her  will.  By 
the  grace  of  her  Spouse  she  can  say  with  him,  Which 
of  you,  0  sworn  enemies,  shall  convince  me  of  sin  ? 
(John  viii.  46.)  And  yet  it  does  not  follow  that  in 
the  Church  there  are  no  sinners.  Eemember  what  I 
have  said  to  you  elsewhere :  the  Spouse  has  hair,  and 
nails,  which  are  not  living  though  she  is  living;  the 
senate  is  sovereign,  but  not  each  senator ;  the  army  is 
victorious,  but  not  each  soldier — it  wins  the  battle 
while  many  of  its  soldiers  are  killed.  In  this  way  is 
the  militant  Church  always  glorious,  ever  victorious 
over  the  gates  and  powers  of  hell,  although  many  of 
her  members,  either  straying  and  thrown  into  disorder 
like  yourselves,  are  cut  to  pieces  and  destroyed,  or  by 
other  mishaps  are  wounded  and  die  within  her.  Take 
then  one  after  another  the  grand  praises  of  the  Church 
which  are  scattered  throughout  the  Scriptures  and  make 
her  a  crown  out  of  them,  for  they  are  richly  due  to 
her;  just  as  maledictions  are  due  to  those  who  being 
in  so  excellent  a  way  are  lost.  Slie  is  an  a?'my  set  in 
array  (Cant.  vi.  9),  though  some  fall  out  of  her  ranks. 
(2.)  But  who  knows  not  how  often  that  is  attributed 
to  a  whole  body  which  belongs  only  to  one  of  the 
parts  ?  The  Spouse  calls  her  beloved  white  and  ruddy; 
but  immediately  she  says  his  locks  are  black  (ibid.  v. 
I  o,  1 1 ).  S.  Matthew  says  (xxvii.  44)  that  the  thieves 
who  were  crucified  with  Our  Saviour  blasphemed  him, 
whereas  it  was  only  one  of  them  who  did  so,  as  S. 
Luke  relates  (xxiii.  39).  We  say  that  lilies  are  white, 
but  there  are  yellow  and  there  are  green.  He  who 
speaks  the  language  of  love  readily  uses  such  expres- 

CHAP.  VIII.]  Mission,  49 

sions,  and  the  Canticles  are  the  chaste  expressions 
of  love.  All  these  qualities  then  are  justly  attri- 
buted to  the  Church  on  account  of  the  many  holy 
souls  therein  who  most  exactly  observe  the  holy 
Commandments  of  God,  and  are  perfect — with  the 
perfection  that  may  be  had  in  this  pilgrimage,  not 
with  that  which  we  hope  for  in  our  blessed  fatherland. 

(3.)  Moreover,  though  there  were  no  other  reason 
for  thus  describing  the  Church  than  the  hope  she  has 
of  ascending,  all  pure,  all  beautiful,  to  heaven  above, 
the  fact  that  this  is  the  sole  term  towards  which  she 
aspires  and  runs,  would  suffice  to  let  her  be  called 
glorious  and  perfect,  especially  while  she  has  so  many 
fair  pledges  of  this  holy  hope. 

He  would  never  end  who  should  take  notice  of  all 
the  trifles  which  they  stay  examining  here,  and  on 
which  they  raise  a  thousand  false  alarms  amongst  the 
poor  common  people.  They  bring  forward  that  of  S. 
John  (x.) ;  /  know  my  slieepy  and  no  one  shall  snatch 
them  out  of  my  hand:  and  they  say  that  those  sheep 
ai'e  the  predestinate,  who  alone  belong  to  the  fold  of 
the  Lord.  They  bring  forward  what  S.  Paul  says  to 
Timothy  (2  Tim.  ii.  19):  The  Lord  knows  ivho  are  his; 
and  what  S.  John  has  said  to  apostates :  they  ivent  ont 
from  tts,  hut  they  ivere  not  of  %ts  {i  John  ii.  19).  But 
what  difficulty  is  there  in  all  this  ?  We  admit  that 
the  predestinate  sheep  hear  the  voice  of  their  pastor, 
and  have  sooner  or  later  all  the  qualities  which  are 
described  in  S.  John  ;  but  he  also  maintains  that  in  the 
Church,  which  is  the  fold  of  Our  Lord,  there  are  not 
only  sheep  but  also  goats.  Otherwise,  why  should  it 
be  said  that  at  the  end  of  the  world,  in  the  Judgment, 
the  sheep  shall  be  separated,  unless  because,  until  the 

UL  D 

50  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  l 

Judgment,  whilst  the  Church  is  in  this  world,  she  has 
within  herself  goats  with  the  sheep  ?  Certainly  if 
they  had  never  been  together  they  would  never  be 
separated.  And  in  the  last  instance,  if  the  predesti- 
nate are  called  sheep,  so  also  are  the  reprobate. 
Witness  David :  Why  is  thy  wrath  enJcindled  against 
the  sheej?  of  thy  pasture  1  (Ps.  Ixxiii.  i).  I  have  gone 
astray  like  a  sheep  that  is  lost  (cxviii.  ult.).  And  else- 
where, where  he  says :  Give  ear,  0  thou  that  rulest 
Israel ;  thou  that  leadest  Joseph  like  a  sheep  (Ixxix.  i) : 
— when  he  says  Joseph,  he  means  those  of  Joseph, 
and  the  Israelitish  people,  because  to  Joseph  was  given 
the  primogeniture,  and  the  eldest  gives  the  name  to 
the  race.  But  who  knows  not  that  among  the  people 
of  Israel  every  one  was  not  predestinate  or  elect,  and 
yet  they  are  called  sheep,  and  all  are  together  under 
one  shepherd.  We  confess  then  that  there  are  sheep 
saved  and  predestinated,  of  whom  it  is  spoken  in  S. 
John :  there  are  others  damned,  of  whom  it  is  spoken 
elsewhere,  and  all  are  in  the  same  flock. 

Isaias  (liii.  6)  compares  all  men,  both  the  reprobate 
and  the  elect,  to  sheep :  All  we  like  sheep  have  gone 
astray ;  and  in  verse  7  he  similarly  compares  Our 
Saviour  :  He  shall  he  led  as  a  sheep  to  the  slaughter.  And 
so  throughout  the  whole  of  c.  xxxiv.  of  Ezechiel,  where 
there  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  whole  people  of  Israel 
are  called  sheep,  over  which  David  has  to  reign  (v.  23). 

And  in  the  same  way, — who  denies  that  Our  Lord 
knows  those  who  are  his  ?  He  knew  certainly  what 
would  become  of  Judas,  yet  Judas  was  not  therefore  not 
one  of  his  Apostles.  He  knew  what  would  become  of 
those  disciples  who  went  hack  (John  vi.  67)  on  account 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  real  eating  of  his  flesh,  and  yet 

CHAP.  VIII.]  Mission*  51 

he  received  them  as  disciples.  It  is  a  quite  different 
thing  to  belong  to  God  according  to  the  eternal  fore- 
knowledge, as  regards  the  Church  Triumphant,  and  to 
belong  to  God  according  to  the  present  communion  of 
Saints  for  the  Church  Militant.  The  first  are  known 
only  to  God,  the  latter  are  known  to  God  and  to  men. 
"  According  to  the  eternal  foreknowledge,"  says  S. 
Augustine,*  "how  many  wolves  are  within;  how  many 
sheep  without ! "  Our  Lord  then  knows  those  who 
are  his  for  his  Triumphant  Church,  but  besides  these 
there  are  many  others  in  the  Militant  Church  whose 
end  will  be  perdition,  as  the  same  Apostle  shows 
when  he  says  that  in  a  great  house  there  are  all  sorts 
of  vessels  and  utensils,  some  indeed  unto  honour^  hut 
some  unto  disho7iour  (2  Tim.  ii.  20). 

So,  what  S.  John  says :  They  have  go7ie  oitt  from 
amongst  us,  hut  they  were  not  of  us,  is  nothing  to  the 
purpose.  For  I  will  say,  as  S.  Augustine  said :  They 
were  with  us  numero,  but  they  were  not  with  us 
merito :  that  is,  as  the  same  Doctor  says,t  "  they  were 
with  us  and  were  ours  by  the  Communion  of  the 
Sacraments,  but  according  to  their  own  individual 
vices  they  were  not  so."  They  were  already  heretics 
in  tbeir  soul  and  will,  though  they  were  not  so  after 
the  external  appearance.  And  this  is  not  to  say  that 
the  good  are  not  with  the  bad  in  the  Church :  on  the 
contrary  indeed,  how  could  they  go  out  of  the  company 
of  the  Church  if  they  were  not  in  it  ?  They  were 
doubtless  in  it  actually,  but  in  will  they  were  already 

Finally,  here  is  an  argument  which  seems  to  be 
complete  in  form  and  in  figure.      "  He  has  not  God 

*  In  J.  xlv.  t  lb.  Ixi. 

52  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  l 

for  Father  who  has  not  the  Church  for  mother ; "  * 
that  is  certain :  similarly  he  who  has  not  God  for 
Father  has  not  the  Church  for  mother ;  most  cer- 
tainly :  now  the  reprobate  have  not  God  for  Father, 
therefore  they  have  not  the  Church  for  mother;  and 
consequently  the  reprobate  are  not  in  the  Church. 
But  the  answer  is  this.  We  accept  the  first  founda- 
tion of  this  reason  ;  but  the  second — that  the  repro- 
bate are  not  children  of  God — requires  to  be  well- 
sifted.  All  the  faithful  baptized  can  be  called  sons 
of  God,  so  long  as  they  are  faithful,  unless  one  would 
take  away  from  Baptism  the  name  of  regeneration  or 
spiritual  nativity  which  Our  Lord  has  given  it.  If 
thus  understood  there  are  many  of  the  reprobate  who 
are  children  of  God,  for  how  many  persons  are  there, 
faithful  and  baptized,  who  will  be  damned,  men  who, 
as  the  Truth  says,  helieve  for  a  ivhile,  and  in  time  of 
temptation  fall  away  (Luke  viii.  13).  So  that  we 
totally  deny  this  second  proposition,  that  the  repro- 
bate are  not  children  of  God.t  For  being^  in  the 
Church  they  can  be  called  children  of  God  by  Crea- 
tion, Eedemption,  Eegeneration,  Doctrine,  Profession 
of  faith ;  although  our  Lord  laments  over  them  in 
this  sort  by  Isaias  (i.  2) :  /  have  brought  wp  children 
....  and  they  have  despised  me.  But  if  one  say 
that  the  reprobate  have  not  God  for  their  Father 
because  they  will  not  be  heirs,  according  to  the  word 
of  the  Apostle,  if  a  son  an  heir  also  (Gal.  iv.  7) — we 
shall  deny  the  consequence :  for  not  onl}^  are  the 
children  within  the  Church,  but  so  are  the  servants 

*  Cyp.  de  unit.  Ecd.  v. 

+  Gal.  iii.  26.     For  you  are  all  the  children  of  God  hy  faith  in  Clirist 
Jesus  ; — and  yet  he  calls  them  senseless  (iii.  i),  and  removed,  &c.  (i.  6). 

CHAP.  VIII.]  Mission,  53 

too,  with  this  dilTerence,  that  the  children  will  abide 
there  for  ever  as  heirs;  the  servants  shall  not,  but 
shall  be  turned  out  when  it  seems  good  to  the 
master.  Witness  the  Master  himself  in  S.  John 
(viii.  35),  and  the  penitent  son  wlio  knew  well  and 
acknowledged  that  many  hired  servants  in  his  father's 
house  abounded  in  bread,  while  he,  true  and  lawful 
son,  was  amongst  tlie  swine,  perishing  with  hunger,  a 
proof  of  the  Catholic  faith  in  tliis  point.  0  how 
many  princes  are  walking  on  the  ground  as  servants 
(Eccles.  X.  7)  !  How  many  unclean  animals  and 
ravens  in  the  Ark  of  the  Church  !  0  how  many 
fair  and  sweet-smelling  apples  are  on  the  tree  cankered 
within  yet  attached  to  the  tree,  and  drawing  good  sap 
from  the  trunk !  He  who  had  eyes  clear-seeing 
enough  to  see  the  issue  of  the  career  of  men,  would 
see  in  the  Church  reason  indeed  to  cry :  many  are 
called  and  few  are  cJiosen  ;  that  is,  many  are  in  the 
Militant  Church  who  will  never  be  in  the  Triumphant. 
How  many  are  within  who  shall  be  without ; — as 
S.  Anthony  foresaw  of  Arius,  and  S.  Fulbert  of  Beren- 
garius.  It  is  then  a  certain  thing  that  not  only  the 
elect  but  also  the  reprobate  can  be  and  are  of  the 
Church.  And  he  who  to  make  it  invisible  would 
place  only  the  elect  therein,  acts  like  the  wicked 
scholar  who  excused  himself  for  not  going  to  the 
assistance  of  his  master,  on  the  ground  that  he  had 
learnt  nothing  about  his  body  but  only  about  his  soul. 

54  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [pabt  j 



I  SHALL  be  more  brief  here,  because  what  I  shall  say- 
in  the  following  chapter  forms  a  strong  proof  for  this 
belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  Church  and  its  perpe- 
tuity. It  is  said  then,  to  escape  the  yoke  of  the  holy 
submission  which  is  owing  to  the  Church,  that  it 
perished  eighty  odd  years  ago  ;  that  it  is  dead  and 
buried,  and  the  holy  light  of  the  true  faith  ex- 
tinguished. All  this  is  open  blasphemy  against  the 
Passion  of  our  Lord,  against  his  Providence,  against 
his  goodness,  against  his  truth. 

Do  we  not  know  the  word  of  our  Lord  himself  : 
And  I ^  if  I  he  lifted  up  from  the  earthy  will  draw  all 
things  to  myself  (John  xii.  3  2)  ?  Was  he  not  lifted 
up  on  the  cross  ?  did  He  not  suffer  ? — and  how  then 
having  drawn  to  himself  the  Church,  should  he  let  it 
escape  so  utterly  from  him  ?  how  should  he  let  go 
this  prize  which  had  cost  him  so  dear  ?  Had  the 
prince  of  the  world,  the  devil,  been  driven  out  with 
the  stick  of  the  cross  for  a  time  of  three  or  four 
hundred  years,  to  return  and  reign  a  thousand  years  ? 
Would  you  make  so  absolutely  vain  the  might  of  the 
cross  ?  Is  your  faithfulness  in  judgment  of  such  a 
sort  that  you  would  thus  iniquitously  divide  our  Lord, 
and  henceforward  place  a  certain  comparison  between 
the  divine  goodness  and  diabolical  malice  ?  No,  no  : 
When  a  strong  man  armed  heepeth  his  court,  those 
things  which  he  possesseth  are  in  peace :  but  if  a  stronger 
than  he  come  upon  him,  and  overcome  him,  he  will  take 

CHAP.  IX.]  Mission,  55 

away  all  his  armour  and  will  distribute  his  spoils 
(Luke  xi.  22,  23).  Are  you  ignorant  that  Our  Lord 
has  purchased  the  Church  with  His  own  Blood  ? — 
and  who  can  take  it  from  him  ?  Think  you  that  he 
is  weaker  than  his  adversary  ?  Ah !  I  pray  you, 
speak  honourably  of  this  captain.  And  who  then 
shall  snatch  his  Church  out  of  his  hands  ?  Perhaps 
you  will  say  he  is  one  who  can  keep  it,  but  who  will 
not.  It  is  then  his  Providence,  his  goodness,  his  truth 
that  you  attack.  The  goodness  of  God  has  given  gifts 
to  men  as  he  ascends  to  heaven  .  .  .  apostles,  prophets, 
evangelists,  pastors,  doctors — for  the  perfection  of  the 
saints  in  the  work  of  the  ministry^  unto  the  edification 
of  the  hody  of  Christ  (Eph.  iv.  12).  Was  the  per- 
fection of  the  saints  already  accomplished  eleven  or 
twelve  hundred  years  ago  ?  Had  the  edification  of 
the  mystical  body  of  our  Lord,  that  is,  the  Church, 
been  completed  ?  Either  cease  to  call  yourselves 
edi tiers  or  answer  no  : — and  if  it  has  not  been  com- 
pleted, as  in  fact  it  has  not,  even  yet,  why  wrong  you 
thus  the  goodness  of  God,  saying  that  he  has  taken 
back  and  carried  away  from  men  what  he  had  given 
them  ?  It  is  one  of  the  qualities  of  the  goodness  of 
God  that,  as  S.  Paul  says  (Eom.  xi.  29)  his  gifts  are 
without  repentance  :  that  is  to  say,  he  does  not  give  in 
order  to  take  away. 

His  divine  Providence,  as  soon  as  it  had  created 
man,  the  heavens,  the  earth,  and  the  things  that  are 
in  heaven  and  on  earth,  preserved  them  and  perpetu- 
ally preserves  them,  in  such  a  way  that  the  species 
{generation)  of  each  tiniest  bird  is  not  yet  extinct. 
What  then  shall  we  say  of  the  Church  ?  All  this 
world  cost  him  at  the  dearest  but  a  simple  word :  he 

56  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

%]p6ke  and  all  tcere  made  (Ps.  cxlviii.  5) ;  and  he  pre- 
serves it  with  a  perpetual  and  infallible  Providence. 
How,  I  ask  you,  should  he  have  abandoned  the  Church, 
which  cost  him  all  his  blood,  so  many  toils  and  travails  ? 
He  has  drawn  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  out  of  the  desert, 
out  of  the  Eed  Sea,  out  of  so  many  calamities  and 
captivities; — and  we  are  to  believe  that  he  has  let 
Christianity  be  engulfed  in  infidelity !  He  has  had 
such  care  of  his  Agar,  and  he  will  despise  Sara !  He 
has  so  highly  favoured  the  servant  who  was  to  be 
driven  out  of  the  house,  and  he  will  hold  the  legiti- 
mate wife  in  no  esteem  !  He  shall  so  greatlv  have 
honoured  the  shadow,  and  will  abandon  the  substance ! 
Oh !  how  utterly  vain  and  good  for  nothing  would  be 
the  promises  on  promises  which  he  has  made  of  the 
perpetuity  of  this  Church. 

It  is  of  the  Church  that  the  Psalmist  sings :  God 
hath  founded  it  for  ever  (xlvii.  9) ;  In  his  days  shall 
justice  s^pring  up,  and  abundance  of  peace,  till  the  moon 
he  taken  away  for  ever  (Ixxi.  7).  What  peace,  what 
justice,  except  in  the  Church  ?  His  throne  (he  is 
speaking  in  the  person  of  the  eternal  Father,  of  the 
Church,  which  is  the  throne  of  the  Messiah,  David's 
son)  shall  he  as  the  sun  hefore  me,  and  as  the  moon 
perfect  for  ever,  and  a  faithful  witness  in  heaven 
(Ixxxviii.  38).  And:  /  will  make  his  seed  to  endure 
for  evermore;  and  his  throne  as  the  days  of  heaven 
(30) ; — that  is,  as  long  as  heaven  shall  endure.  Daniel 
(ii.  44)  calls  it:  A  kingdom  ivhich  shall  not  he  de- 
stroyed  for  ever.  The  angel  says  to  Our  Lady  that  of 
his  kingdom  there  shall  he  no  end  (Luke  i.  33),  and  he 
is  speaking  of  the  Church,  as  we  prove  elsewhere. 
Did  not  Isaias  prophesy  thus  of  Our  Lord  (liii.  10): 

CHAP.  IX.]  Mission,  57 

If  he  shall  lay  doivn  his  life  for  sin,  he  shall  see  a  long- 
lived  seed,  that  is,  of  long  duration :  and  elsewhere 
(Ixi.  8)  :  I  will  make  a  perpetual  covenant  with  them  ; 
and :  all  that  see  them  (he  speaks  of  the  visible 
Church)  shall  know  them  ? 

Now,  I  ask  you,  who  has  given  Luther  and  Calvin 
a  commission  to  revoke  so  many  holy  and  solemn 
promises  of  perpetuity  which  Our  Lord  has  made  to 
his  Church  ?  Is  it  not  Our  Lord  who,  speaking  of  his 
Church,  says  that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it  ?  How  shall  this  promise  be  verified  if  the 
Church  has  been  abolished  a  thousand  years  or  more  ? 
How  shall  we  understand  that  sweet  adieu  our  Lord 
made  to  his  Apostles :  Behold  I  am  with  you  all  days, 
even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world  (Matt,  ult.),  if 
we  say  that  the  Church  can  perish  ?  Or  do  we  really 
wish  to  violate  the  sound  rule  of  Gamaliel,  who  speak- 
ing of  the  rising  Church  used  this  argument :  If  this 
design  or  ivork  he  of  men,  it  will  fall  to  nx)thing ;  hut  if 
it  he  of  God,  you  are  not  able  to  destroy  it  (Acts  v.  38, 
39)  ?  Is  not  the  Church  the  work  of  God  ? — and 
how  then  shall  we  say  that  it  has  come  to  nothing  ? 

If  this  fair  tree  of  the  Church  had  been  planted  by 
man's  hand  I  would  easily  acknowledge  that  it  could 
be  rooted  up,  but  having  been  planted  by  so  good  a 
hand  as  is  that  of  our  Lord,  I  could  not  offer  better 
counsel  to  those  who  hear  people  crying  at  every  turn 
that  the  Church  had  perished  than  what  our  Lord 
said :  Let  these  blind  people  alone,  for  every  plant 
which  God  hath  not  planted  shall  he  rooted  up  (Matt. 
XV.  13,  14). 

S.  Paul  says  that  all  shall  he  made  alive ;  hut  each 
one  in  his  own  order :  the  first-fruits  Christy  then  they 

58  The  Catholic  Controversy,  Lp^^rt  i. 

that  are  of  Christ,  .  .  .  afterwards  the  end  (i  Cor.  xv. 
22,  23,  24).  Between  Christ  and  those  that  are  of 
Christ,  that  is,  the  Church,  there  is  no  interval,  for 
ascending  up  to  heaven  he  has  left  them  on  earth; 
between  the  Church  and  the  end  there  is  no  interval, 
since  it  was  to  last  unto  the  end.  How !  was  not  our 
Lord  to  reign  in  the  midst  of  his  enemies,  until  he  had 
put  under  his  feet  and  subjected  all  who  were  opposed 
to  him  (Ps.  cix.  2)  ? — and  how  shall  these  authorities 
be  fulfilled,  if  the  Church,  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord, 
has  been  ruined  and  destroyed  ?  How  should  he  reign 
without  a  kingdom,  and  how  should  he  reign  among 
his  enemies  unless  he  reigned  in  this  world  below  ? 

But,  I  pray  you,  if  this  Spouse  had  died,  who  first 
drew  life  from  the  side  of  her  Bridegroom  asleep  on 
the  cross,  if,  I  say,  she  had  died,  who  would  have 
raised  her  from  the  dead  ?  Do  we  not  know  that  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  is  not  a  less  miracle  than 
creation,  and  much  greater  than  continuation  or  pre- 
servation ?  Do  we  not  know  that  the  re-formation  of 
man  is  a  much  deeper  mystery  than  the  formation  ? 
In  the  formation  God  spake,  and  man  was  made,  he 
breathed  into  him  the  living  soul,  and  had  no  sooner 
breathed  it  into  him  than  this  man  besjan  himself  to 
breathe:  but  in  his  re-formation  God  employed  thirty- 
three  years,  sweated  blood  and  water,  yea,  he  died  over 
this  re-formation.  Whoever  then  is  rash  enough  to 
say  that  this  Church  is  dead,  calls  in  question  the 
goodness,  the  diligence  and  the  wisdom  of  this  great 
Eeformer.  And  he  who  thinks  himself  to  be  the 
reformer  or  resuscitator  thereof,  attributes  to  himself 
the  honour  due  to  Jesus  Christ  alone,  and  makes  him- 
self greater  than  the  Apostles.     The  Apostles  have 

CHAP.  IX.]  Mission.  59 

not  brought  the  Church  back  to  life,  but  have  pre- 
served its  life  by  their  ministry,  after  our  Lord  had 
instituted  it.  He  then  who  says  that  having  found 
the  Church  dead  he  has  raised  it  to  life — does  he  not 
in  your  opinion  deserve  to  be  seated  on  the  throne  of 
audacity  ?  Our  Lord  had  cast  the  fire  of  his  charity 
upon  the  earth,  the  Apostles  blowing  on  it  by  their 
preaching  had  increased  it  and  spread  it  throughout 
the  world :  you  say  it  has  been  extinguished  by  the 
waters  of  ignorance  and  iniquity ; — who  shall  enkindle 
it  again  ?  ^  Blowing  is  of  no  use  :  what  is  to  be  done 
then  ?  Perhaps  we  must  strike  again  with  nails  and 
lance  on  Jesus  Christ  the  holy  living  stone,  to  bring 
forth  a  new  fire  : — or  shall  it  be  enough  to  have  Calvin 
or  Luther  in  the  world  to  relight  it  ?  This  would 
indeed  be  to  be  third  Eliases,  for  neither  Elias  nor  S. 
John  Baptist  did  ever  as  much.  This  would  be  leaving 
all  the  Apostles  far  far  behind,  who  did  indeed  carry 
this  fire  throughout  the  world,  but  did  not  enkindle  it. 
"  0  impudent  cry ! "  says  S.  Augustine  against  the 
Donatists,t  "  the  Church  is  not,  because  you  are  not 
in  it !  "  "  No,  no,"  says  S.  Bernard,t  "  tlu  floods  came, 
and  the  winds  hleiv,  o,nd  they  heat  upon  that  house,  and 
it  fell  not ;  for  it  was  founded  upon  a  rock  (Matt.  vii. 
25),  and  the  rock  was  Christ  (i  Cor.  x.  4)." 

And  to  say  the  Church  has  failed — what  else  is  it 
but  to  say  that  all  our  predecessors  are  damned.  Yes, 
truly  ;  for  outside  the  true  Church  there  is  no  salva- 
tion, out  of  this  Ark  every  one  is  lost.  Oh  what  a 
return  we  make  to  those  good  Fathers  who  have 
suffered  so  much  to  preserve  to  us  the  inheritance  of 
the  Gospel :  and  now  so  arrogant  are  their  children 

*  In  Ps.  ci.,  S.  2.  t  S.  79  m  Cant. 

6o  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

that  they  scorn  them,  and  hold  them  as  silly  fools  and 

I  will  conclude  this  proof  with  S.  Augustine,*  and 
say  to  your  ministers :  "  What  do  you  bring  us  new  ? 
Shall  it  be  necessary  to  sow  again  the  good  seed, 
whereas  from  the  time  of  its  sowinoj  it  is  to  ijrow  till 
the  harvest  ?  If  you  say  that  what  the  Apostles  sowed 
has  everywhere  perished,  we  answer  to  you :  read 
this  to  us  from  the  Holy  Scriptures :  this  you  shall 
never  do  without  having  first  shown  us  that  this  is 
false  which  is  written,  saying,  that  the  seed  which  was 
sown  in  the  beginning  should  grow  till  the  time  of  the 
harvest.  The  sfood  seed  is  the  children  of  the  kin^- 
dom,  the  cockle  is  the  wicked,  the  harvest  is  the  end 
of  the  world  (Matt.  xiii.).  Say  not  then  that  the 
good  seed  is  destroyed  or  choked,  for  it  grows  even 
to  the  consummation  of  the  world." 



(i.)  Was  not  the  Church  everywhere  destroyed  when 
Adam  and  Eve  sinned  ?  Answer :  Adam  and  Eve 
were  not  the  Church,  but  the  commencement  of  the 
Church.  And  it  is  not  true  that  the  Church  was 
ruined  then,  or  yet  that  it  had  been,  because  they  did 
not  sin  in  doctrine  or  belief  but  in  act. 

(2.)  Did  not  Aaron  the  High  Priest  adore  the  golden 

*  l)c  Unit.  Eccl.  xvii. 

OHAP.  X.]  Mission.  6i 

calf  with  all  his  people  ?  Answer :  Aaron  was  not 
as  yet  High  Priest,  nor  head  of  the  people,  but  became 
so  afterwards.  And  it  is  not  true  that  all  the  people 
worshipped  idols  : — for  were  not  the  children  of  Levi 
men  of  God,  who  joined  themselves  to  Moses  ? 

(3.)  Elias  lamented  that  he  was  alone  in  Israel 
(3  K.  xix.  14).  Answer:  Elias  was  not  the  only 
good  man  in  Israel,  for  there  were  seven  thousand 
men  who  had  not  given  themselves  up  to  idolatry,  and 
what  the  Prophet  says  here  is  only  to  express  better 
the  justice  of  his  complaint.  It  is  not  true  again  that 
if  all  Israel  had  failed,  the  Church  would  have  there- 
by ceased  to  exist,  for  Israel  was  not  the  whole  Church. 
Indeed  it  was  already  separated  therefrom  by  the 
schism  of  Jeroboam  ;  and  the  kingdom  of  Juda  was 
the  better  and  principal  part ;  and  it  is  Israel,  not 
Juda,  of  which  Azarias  predicted  (II  Par.  xv.  3),  that 
it  should  be  without  priest  and  sacrifice. 

(4.)  Isaias  says  (i.  6)  that  from  head  to  foot  tlure 
is  no  soundness.  Answer :  these  are  forms  of  speak- 
ing, and  of  vehemently  detesting  the  vice  of  a  people. 
And  although  the  Prophets,  pastors  and  preachers  use 
these  general  modes  of  expression,  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand them  of  each  particular  person,  but  only  of  a 
large  porportion ;  as  appears  by  the  example  of  Elias 
who  complained  that  he  was  alone,  notwithstanding 
that  there  were  yet  seven  thousand  faithful.  S.  Paul 
complains  to  the  Philippians  (ii.  21)  that  all  seek  their 
own  interest  and  advantage ;  still  at  the  end  of  the 
Epistle  he  acknowledges  that  there  were  many  good 
people  with  him  and  with  them.  Who  knows  not 
the  complaint  of  David  (Ps.  xiii.  3),  that  there  is  none 
that  doth  good,  no,  not  one  ? — and  who  knows  not  on  the 

62  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  l 

other  hand  that  there  were  many  good  people  in  his 
day  ?  These  forms  of  speech  are  frequent,  but  we 
must  not  draw  a  particular  conclusion  about  each 
individual.  Further, — such  things  do  not  prove  that 
faith  had  failed  .  in  the  Church,  nor  that  the  Church 
was  dead :  for  it  does  not  follow  that  if  a  body  is 
everywhere  diseased  it  is  therefore  dead.  Thus,  with- 
out doubt,  are  to  be  understood  all  similar  things 
which  are  found  in  the  threats  and  rebukes  of  the 

(4.)  Jeremias  tells  us  (vii.  4)  not  to  trust  in  lying 
words,  saying :  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,  the  Temple  of 
the  Lord.  Answer :  who  maintains  that  under  pre- 
tence of  the  Church  we  are  to  trust  to  a  lie  ?  Yea, 
on  the  contrary,  he  who  rests  on  the  judgment  of  the 
Church  rests  on  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth ;  he 
who  trusts  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  trusts  to 
no  lie,  unless  that  is  a  lie  which  is  written  :  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.  We  place  our  trust 
then  in  the  Holy  Word,  which  promises  perpetuity  to 
the  Church. 

(5.)  Is  it  not  written  that  the  revolt  and  separation 
must  come  (2  Thess.  ii.  3),  and  that  the  sacrifice  shall 
cease  (Dan.  xii.  11),  and  that  the  Son  of  Man  shall 
hardly  find  faith  on  earth  at  his  second  A/isible  return 
(Luke  xviii.  8),  when  he  will  come  to  judge  ?  Answer : 
all  these  passages  are  understood  of  the  affliction  which 
antichrist  will  cause  in  the  Church,  during  the  three 
and  a  half  years  that  he  si  1  all  reign  mightily ;  but  in 
spite  of  this  the  Church  during  even  these  three  years 
shall  not  fail,  and  shall  be  fed  and  preserved  amid  the 
deserts  and  solitudes  whither  it  shall  retire,  as  the 
Scripture  says  (Apoc.  xii.). 

CHAP.  XL]  Mission,  63 




The  ancients  had  wisely  said  that  to  distinguish 
correctly  the  different  times  referred  to  in  the  Scrip- 
tures is  a  good  rule  for  interpreting  them  aright ; 
for  lack  of  which  distinction  the  Jews  continually  err, 
attributing  to  the  first  coming  of  the  Messias  what 
is  properly  said  of  the  second :  and  the  adversaries  of 
the  Church  err  yet  more  grossly,  when  they  would 
make  the  Church  such  from  the  time  of  S.  Gregory 
to  this  age  as  it  is  to  be  in  the  time  of  antichrist. 
They  wrest  to  this  sense  that  which  is  written  in  the 
Apocalypse  (xii.  6),  that  the  woman  fled  into  solitude ; 
and  draw  the  consequence  that  the  Church  has  been 
hidden  and  secret,  trembling  at  the  tyranny  of  the 
Pope,  this  thousand  years,  until  she  has  come  forward 
in  Luther  and  his  adherents.  But  who  sees  not  that 
all  this  passage  refers  to  the  end  of  the  world,  and  the 
persecution  of  antichrist,  the  time  three  years  and  a 
half  being  expressly  determined  therein ;  and  in  Daniel 
also  (xii.  7)  ?  And  he  who  would  by  some  gloss 
extend  this  time  which  the  Scripture  has  limited  would 
openly  contradict  Our  Lord,  who  says  (Matt.  xxiv.  22) 
that  for  the  sake  of  the  elect  those  dags  shall  he  shortened. 
How  then  do  they  dare  to  transfer  this  Scripture  to 
an  interpretation  so  foreign  to  the  intention  of  the 
author,  and  so  contrary  to  its  own  circumstances, 
refusing  to  look  at  so  many  other  holy  words  which 
prove  and  certify,  loudly  and  clearly,  that  the  Church 

64  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

shall  never  be  in  the  desert  thus  hidden  until  that 
extremity,  and  for  that  short  time ;  that  she  will  he 
seen  to  flee  thither  and  be  seen  thence  to  come  forth  ? 
I  will  not  again  bring  forward  the  numerous  passages 
previously  cited,  in  which  the  Church  is  said  to  be  like 
to  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  rainbow,  a  queen,  a  moun- 
tain as  great  as  the  world, — and  a  multitude  of  others. 
I  will  content  myself  with  putting  before  your  con- 
sideration two  great  captains  of  the  ancient  Church, 
two  of  the  most  valiant  that  ever  were,  S.  Augustine 
and  S.  Jerome.  David  had  said  (Ps.  xlvii.  i) :  The 
Lord  is  great  and  exceedingly  to  he  praised,  in  the  city  of 
our  God  in  his  holy  mountain.  "  This  is  the  city," 
says  S.  Augustine,*  "  set  on  a  mountain,  that  cannot 
be  hid.  This  is  the  light  which  cannot  be  concealed, 
nor  put  under  a  lushel,  which  is  known  to  all,  famous 
to  all : "  for  it  follows  :  With  the  joy  of  the  whole  earth 
is  Mount  Sion  founded.  And  in  fact  how  would  Our 
Lord,  who  said  that  men  do  not  light  a  candle  and  jmt 
it  under  a  hushel  (Matt.  v.  15),  have  placed  so  many 
lights  in  the  Church  to  go  and  hide  them  in  certain 
unknown  corners  ?  S.  Augustine  continues  :  t  "  This 
is  the  mountain  which  covers  the  whole  face  of  the 
earth :  this  is  the  city  of  which  it  is  said :  A  city  set 
on  a  mountain  cannot  be  hid.  The  Donatists  (the 
Calvinists)  come  up  to  the  mountain,  and  wlien  we  say 
to  them,  ascend ; — it  is  not  a  mountain,  say  they,  and 
they  rather  strike  their  heads  against  it  than  establish 
their  dwelling  on  it.  Isaias,  whom  we  read  yesterday, 
— cried  out  (ii.  2) :  In  the  last  days  the  mo^mtain  of 
the  house  of  the  Lord  shcdl  he  prepared  on  the  top  of 

*  In  Ps,  xlvii. 

t  111  Ep.  I*"  Joan.  Tr.  i.  The  order  is  slightly  changed  [Tr.]. 

CHAP.  XI.]  Mission.  65 

mountains^  and  all  nations  shall  flow  into  it.  What 
is  there  so  visible  as  a  mountain  ? — Yet  there  are 
mountains  unknown  because  they  are  situated  in  a 
corner  of  the  earth.  Who  amongst  you  knows 
Olympus  ?  No  one,  I  am  sure,  any  more  or  any  less 
than  its  inhabitants  know  our  Mount  Giddaba.  These 
mountains  are  in  parts  of  the  earth :  but  that  mount 
not  so ;  for  it  has  filled  the  whole  face  of  the  earth. 
The  stone  cut  from  the  mountain,  without  any  new 
operation  (Dan.  ii.),  is  it  not  Jesus  Christ,  springing 
from  the  race  of  the  Jews  without  operation  of 
marriage  ?  And  did  not  this  stone  break  in  pieces 
all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth,  that  is,  all  the  domina- 
tions of  idols  and  demons  ? — did  it  not  increase  until 
it  filled  the  whole  earth  ?  It  is  then  of  this  moun- 
tain that  is  said  the  word,  prepared  on  the  top  of  moun- 
tains ;  it  is  a  mountain  elevated  above  the  heads  of 
all  mountains,  and  all  nations  shall  flow  into  it. 
Who  can  get  lost,  or  can  miss  this  mountain  ?  Who 
knocks  against  and  breaks  his  head  against  this  ? 
Who  fails  to  see  the  city  set  on  a  mountain  ?  Yet 
no ;  be  not  astonished  that  it  is  unknown  to  those  who 
hate  the  brethren,  who  hate  the  Church.  For  by 
this  they  walk  in  darkness,  and  know  not  where  they 
go.  They  are  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  universe, 
they  are  blind  with  anger."  Such  are  the  words  of 
S.  Augustine  against  the  Donatists,  but  the  present 
Church  so  perfectly  resembles  the  first  Church,  and  the 
heretics  of  our  age  those  of  old,  that  by  merely  chang- 
ing the  names  the  ancient  reasons  press  the  Calvinists 
as  closely  home  as  they  did  those  ancient  Donatists. 
S.  Jerome  *  enters  into  the  fray  from  another  side, 

*  Contra  Lucif.  14,  15. 
III.  E 

66  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

which  is  just  as  dangerous  to  you  as  the  former ;  foi 
he  makes  it  clearly  evident  that  this  pretended  dis- 
persion, this  retreat  and  hiddenness,  destroy  the  glory 
of  the  cross  of  Our  Lord.  For,  speaking  to  a  schis- 
matic who  had  rejoined  the  Church,  he  says :  "  I 
rejoice  with  thee,  and  give  thanks  to  Jesus  Christ  my 
God,  in  that  thou  hast  turned  back  in  good  earnest 
from  the  heat  of  falsehood  to  that  which  is  the  sweet- 
ness and  savour  of  the  whole  world.  And  say  not 
like  some  do :  ^ave  me,  0  Lord,  for  there  is  now  no 
saint  (Ps.  xi.  i);  whose  impious  voice  makes  vain 
the  cross  of  Christ,  subjects  the  Son  of  God  to  the 
devil,  and  understands  that  grief  which  the  Saviour 
has  poured  out  over  sinners  to  be  expressed  concern- 
ing all  men.  But  let  it  never  be  that  God  should 
die  for  nothing,  the  mighty  one  is  bound  and  despoiled 
of  all,  the  word  of  God  is  accomplished :  ask  of  me, 
and  I  vnll  give  thee  the  Gentiles  for  thy  inheritance,  and 
the  utmost  parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  possession  (Ps.  ii.  8). 
Where,  I  pray  you,  are  those  too  religious,  yea,  rather 
too  profane  persons,  who  declare  there  are  more 
synagogues  than  churches  ?  How  shall  the  cities  of 
the  devil  be  destroyed,  and  at  last,  that  is,  at  the 
consummation  of  the  world,  how  shall  the  idols  be 
thrown  down,  if  Our  Lord  has  had  no  Church,  or  has 
had  it  only  in  Sardinia  ?  Certainly  he  is  become 
too  indigent."  Yes,  indeed,  if  Satan  possess  at  the 
same  time  England,  France,  the  East,  the  Indies, 
barbarous  nations  and  every  place, — how  would  the 
trophies  of  the  cross  be  collected  and  squeezed  into 
one  corner  of  the  world.  And  what  would  this  great 
man  say  of  those  who  not  only  deny  that  it  has  been 
general   and  universal,  but  say  that  it  was  only  in 

CHAP.  XL]  Mission.  6y 

certain  unknown  persons,  and  will  not  specify  one 
single  little  village  where  it  was  eighty  years  ago  ? 
Is  not  this  greatly  to  bring  down  the  glorious  trophies 
of  Our  Lord  ?  The  heavenly  Father,  for  the  great 
humiliation  and  annihilation  which  Our  Lord  had 
undergone  on  the  tree  of  the  cross,  had  made  his 
name  so  glorious  that  all  knees  were  to  bow  and  bend 
in  reverence  of  him;  but  these  people  do  not  thus 
value  the  cross  or  the  actions  of  the  Crucified,  taking 
from  this  account  all  the  generations  of  a  thousand 
years.  The  Father  had  given  him  as  his  inheritance 
many  nations,  because  he  had  delivered  his  soul  to 
death  (Isa.  liii.  1 2),  and  had  been  reputed  with  male- 
factors and  robbers ;  but  these  people  make  his  in- 
heritance narrow  indeed,  and  so  cut  away  his  portion 
that  hardly  during  a  thousand  years  shall  he  have  a  few 
secret  followers,  yea,  shall  have  had  none  at  all !  For 
I  address  myself  to  you,  0  predecessors,  who  bear  the 
name  of  Christian,  and  who  have  been  in  the  true 
Church.  Either  you  had  the  true  faith  or  you  had  it 
not.  If  you  had  it  not,  0  unhappy  ones,  you  are 
damned  ;  and  if  you  had  it  why  did  you  conceal  it 
from  others,  why  did  you  leave  no  memorials  of  it, 
why  did  you  not  set  yourselves  against  impiety,  ido- 
latry ?  In  no  wise  were  you  ignorant  that  God  has 
recommended  to  each  one  his  neighbour.  Certainly 
with  the  heart  we  believe  unto  justice  ;  but  for  salvation 
we  must  make  confession  of  our  faith  (Eom.  x.  10), 
and  how  could  you  say  :  /  have  believed,  therefore  have 
I  spoken  (Ps.  cxv.  i)?  0  miserable  again  for  having 
so  excellent  a  talent  and  hiding  it  in  the  earth.  If 
the  case  is  so  ye  are  in  the  exterior  darkness ;  but  if, 
on  the  contrary,  0  Luther,  0  Calvin,  the  true  faith 

68  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

has  always  been  published  and  continually  preached 
by  all  our  predecessors,  yourselves  are  miserable  who 
have  a  quite  opposite  one,  and  who,  to  find  some 
excuse  for  your  wills  and  your  fancies,  accuse  all  the 
Fathers  either  of  impiety  if  they  have  believed  ill, 
or  of  treachery  if  they  have  kept  silence. 



Once  when  Absalom  wished  to  form  a  faction  and 
division  against  his  good  father  David,  he  sat  in  the 
way  near  the  gate,  and  said  to  each  person  that  went 
by :  There  is  no  man  appointed  hy  the  king  to  hear 
thee  ...  0  that  they  would  make  me  judge  over  the 
land,  that  all  that  have  husiness  might  come  to  me,  that  I 
might  do  them  justice.*  Thus  did  he  seduce  the 
loyalty  of  the  Israelites.  0  how  many  Absaloms 
have  there  been  in  our  age,  who,  to  seduce  and  distort 
the  people  of  Our  Lord  from  obedience  to  the  Church 
and  her  pastors,  and  to  lead  away  Christian  lealty 
into  rebellion  and  revolt,  have  cried  up  and  down  the 
ways  of  Germany  and  of  France :  there  is  no  one 
appointed  by  God  to  hear  doubts  concerning  the  faith 
and  to  answer  them  ;  the  Church  itself,  the  rulers  of 
the  Church,  have  no  power  to  determine  what  we  are 
to  hold  as  to  the  faith  and  what  we  are  not ;  we  must 
seek  other  judges  than  the  prelates,  the  Church  can 
err  in  its  decrees  and  rules.     But  what  more  hurtful 

*  2  Kings  XV. 

CHAP.  XII.]  Mission.  69 

and  audacious  proposition  could  they  make  to  Chris- 
tianity 4:han  that  ?  If  then  the  Church  can  err,  0 
Calvin,  0  Luther,  to  whom  shall  I  have  recourse  in 
my  difficulties  ?  To  the  Scripture,  say  they.  But 
what  shall  I,  poor  man,  do,  for  it  is  precisely  about 
the  Scripture  that  my  difficulty  lies.  I  am  not  in 
doubt  whether  I  must  believe  the  Scripture  or  not ;  for 
who  knows  not  that  it  is  the  Word  of  Truth  ?  What 
keeps  me  in  anxiety  is  the  understanding  of  this 
Scripture,  is  the  conclusions  to  be  drawn  from  it, 
which  are  innumerable  and  diverse  and  opposite  on 
the  same  subject ;  and  everybody  takes  his  view,  one 
this,  another  that,  though  out  of  all  there  is  but  one 
which  is  sound  : — Ah  !  who  will  give  me  to  know 
the  good  among  so  many  bad  ?  who  will  tell  me  the 
real  verity  through  so  many  specious  and  masked 
vanities.  Everybody  would  embark  on  the  ship  of 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  there  is  but  one,  and  only  that  one 
shall  reach  the  port,  all  the  rest  are  on  their  way  to 
shipwreck.  Ah !  what  danger  am  I  in  of  erring ! 
All  shout  out  their  claims  with  equal  assurance  and 
thus  deceive  the  greater  part,  for  all  boast  that  theirs 
is  the  ship.  Whoever  says  that  our  Master  has  not 
left  us  guides  in  so  dangerous  and  difficult  a  way, 
says  that  he  wishes  us  to  perish.  Whoever  says  that 
he  has  put  us  aboard  at  the  mercy  of  wind  and  tide, 
without  giving  us  a  skilful  pilot  able  to  use  properly 
his  compass  and  chart,  says  that  the  Saviour  is  want- 
ing in  foresight.  Whoever  says  that  this  good  Father 
has  sent  us  into  this  school  of  the  Church,  knowing 
that  error  was  taught  there,  says  that  he  intended  to 
foster  our  vice  and  our  ignorance.  Who  has  ever  heard 
of  an  academy  in  which  everybody  taught,  and  nobody 

70  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [pakt  i. 

was  a  scholar  ? — such  would  be  the  Christian  common- 
wealth if  the  Church  can  err.  For  if  the  Church  her- 
self err,  who  shall  not  err  ?  and  if  each  one  in  it  err, 
or  can  err,  to  whom  shall  I  betake  myself  for  instruc- 
tion ? — to  Calvin  ?  but  why  to  him  rather  than  to 
Luther,  or  Brentius,  or  Pacimontanus  ?  Truly,  if  I 
must  take  my  chance  of  being  damned  for  error,  I  will 
be  so  for  my  own  not  for  another's,  and  will  let  these 
wits  of  mine  scatter  freely  about,  and  maybe  they  will 
find  the  truth  as  quickly  as  anybody  else.  We  should 
not  know  then  whither  to  turn  in  our  difficulties  if  the 
Church  erred.  But  he  who  shall  consider  how  per- 
fectly authentic  is  the  testimony  which  God  has  given 
of  the  Church,  will  see  that  to  say  the  Church  errs  is 
to  say  no  less  than  that  God  errs,  or  else  that  he  is 
willing  and  desirous  for  us  to  err ;  which  would  be  a 
great  blasphemy.  For  is  it  not  Our  Lord  who  says : 
If  thy  hrother  shall  offend  thee  .  .  .  tell  the  Churchy  and 
if  he  will  not  hear  the  Church,  let  him  he  to  thee  as  the 
heathen  and  the  pvhlican  (Matt,  xviii.)  Do  you  see 
how  Our  Lord  sends  us  to  the  Church  in  our  differ- 
ences, whatever  they  may  be  ?  How  much  more 
in  more  serious  offences  and  differences !  Certainly 
if  by  the  order  of  fraternal  correction  I  am  obliged  to 
go  to  the  Church  to  effect  the  amendment  of  some  evil 
person  who  has  offended  me,  how  much  more  shall  I 
be  obliged  to  denounce  him  who  calls  the  whole  Church 
Babylon,  adulterous,  idolatrous,  perjured  ?  And  so 
much  the  more  because  with  this  evil-mindedness  of  his 
he  can  seduce  and  infect  a  whole  province ; — the  vice 
of  heresy  being  so  contagious  that  it  spreadeth  like  a 
cancer  (2  Tim.  ii.  17)  for  a  time.  When,  therefore,  I 
see  some  one  who  says  that  all  our  fathers,  grand- 

CHAP.  XII.]  Mission,  71 

fathers,  and  great-grandfathers  have  fallen  into  idolatry, 
have  corrupted  the  Gospel,  and  committed  all  the 
iniquities  which  follow  upon  the  fall  of  religion,  I  will 
address  myself  to  the  Church,  whose  judgment  every 
one  must  submit  to.  But  if  she  can  err  then  it  is  no 
longer  I,  or  man,  who  will  keep  error  in  the  world : 
it  will  be  our  God  himself  who  will  authorise  it  and 
give  it  credit,  since  he  commands  us  to  go  to  this 
tribunal  to  hear  and  receive  justice.  Either  he  does 
not  know  what  is  done  there,  or  he  wishes  to  deceive 
us,  or  true  justice  is  really  done  there ;  and  the  judg- 
ments are  irrevocable.  The  Church  has  condemned 
Berengarius ;  if  any  one  would  further  discuss  this 
matter,  I  hold  him  as  a  heathen  and  a  publican,  iu 
order  to  obey  my  Saviour,  who  leaves  me  no  choice 
herein,  but  gives  me  this  order :  Ld  him  he,  to  thee,  as 
a  heathen  and  a  puhlican.  It  is  the  same  as  S.  Paul 
teaches  when  he  calls  the  Church  the  pillar  and  ground 
of  truth  (i  Tim.  iii.  15).  Is  not  this  to  say  that  truth 
is  solidly  upheld  in  the  Church  ?  Elsewhere  truth  is 
only  maintained  at  intervals,  it  falls  often,  but  in  the 
Church  it  is  without  vicissitude,  unmovable,  unshaken, 
in  a  word  steadfast  and  perpetual.  To  answer  that 
S.  Paul's  meaning  is  that  Scripture  has  been  put  under 
the  guardianship  of  the  Church,  and  no  more,  is  to 
weaken  the  proposed  similitude  too  much.  Eor  to 
uphold  the  truth  is  a  very  different  thing  from  guard- 
ing the  Scripture.  The  Jews  guard  a  part  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  so  do  many  heretics ;  but  they  are  not 
on  that  account  a  column  and  ground  of  truth.  The 
bark  of  the  letter  is  neither  truth  nor  falsehood,  but 
according  to  the  sense  that  we  give  it  is  it  true  or 
false.      The  truth  consists  in  the  sense,  which  is,  as 

72  The  Catholic  Co7itroversy.  [part  i. 

it  were,  the  marrow.  And  therefore  if  the  Church 
were  guardian  of  the  truth,  the  sense  of  the  Scripture 
would  have  been  entrusted  to  her  care,  and  it  would 
be  necessary  to  seek  it  with  her,  and  not  in  the  brain 
of  Luther  or  Calvin  or  any  private  person.  Therefore 
she  cannot  err,  ever  having  the  sense  of  the  Scriptures. 
And  in  fact  to  place  with  this  sacred  depository  the 
letter  without  the  sense,  would  be  to  place  therein  the 
purse  without  the  gold,  the  shell  without  the  kernel, 
the  scabbard  without  the  sword,  the  box  without  the 
ointment,  the  leaves  without  the  fruit,  the  shadow 
without  the  body.  But  tell  me,  if  the  Church 
has  the  care  of  the  Scriptures,  why  did  Luther 
take  them  and  carry  them  away  from  her  ?  And 
why  do  you  not  receive  at  her  hands  the  Machabees, 
Ecclesiasticus,  and  the  rest,  as  much  as  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  ?  For  she  protests  that  she  has  just  as 
jealous  a  care  of  those  as  of  these.  In  short,  the 
words  of  S.  Paul  cannot  suffer  this  sense  that  you 
would  give  them  :  he  speaks  of  the  visible  Church, — 
for  where  would  he  direct  his  Timothy  to  hehave  him- 
self? He  calls  it  the  house  of  Our  Saviour;  therefore 
it  is  well  founded,  well  ordered,  well  sheltered  against 
all  storms  and  tempest  of  error.  It  is  the  pillar  and 
ground  of  truth ;  truth  then  is  in  it,  it  abides  there,  it 
dwells  there ;  who  seeks  it  elsewhere  loses  it.  It  is 
so  thoroughly  safe  and  firm  that  all  the  gates  of  hell, 
that  is,  all  tlie  forces  of  the  enemy,  cannot  make  them- 
selves masters  of  it.  And  would  not  the  place  be  taken 
by  the  enemy  if  error  entered  it,  with  regard  to  the 
things  which  are  for  the  honour  and  service  of  the 
Master  ?  Our  Lord  is  the  head  of  the  Church, — are 
you  not  ashamed  to  say  that  the  body  of  so  holy  a 

CHAP,  xii.]  Mission.  73 

head  is  adulterous,  profane,  corrupt  ?  And  say  not 
that  he  is  head  of  an  invisible  Church,  for,  since  there 
is  only  a  visible  Church  (as  I  have  shown  above)  our 
Lord  is  the  head  of  that ;  as  S.  Paul  says :  And  he 
hath  made  him  head  over  all  the  Church  (Eph.  i  22) ; 
not  over  one  Church  out  of  two,  as  you  imagine, 
but  over  the  whole  Church.  Where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  he  is  in  the 
midst  of  them  (Matt,  xviii.  20).  Ah !  who  shall  say 
that  the  assembly  of  the  universal  Church  of  all  time 
has  been  abandoned  to  the  mercy  of  error  and  im- 
piety ?  I  conclude  then  that  when  we  see  that  the 
universal  Church  has  been  and  is  in  the  belief  of  some 
article, — whether  we  see  it  expressly  in  the  Scripture, 
whether  it  is  drawn  therefrom  by  some  deduction,  or 
again  by  tradition, — we  must  in  no  way  judge,  nor 
dispute,  nor  doubt  concerning  it,  but  show  obedience 
and  homage  to  this  heavenly  Queen,  as  Christ  com- 
mands, and  regulate  our  faith  by  this  standard :  And 
if  it  would  have  been  impious  in  the  Apostles  to  con- 
test with  their  Master,  so  will  it  be  in  him  who  con- 
tests with  the  Church.  For  if  the  Father  has  said  of 
the  Son  :  Hear  ye  him,  the  Son  has  said  of  the  Church  : 
If  any  one  will  not  hear  the  Church,  let  him  he  to  the( 
as  a  heathen  and  a  publican. 

74  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [paet  i. 



I  AM  not  now  concerned  to  show  how  your  ministers 
have  degraded  the  holiness  and  majesty  of  the  Spouse 
of  Jesus  Christ.  They  cry  out  loud  and  clear  that  she 
has  remained  eight  hundred  years  adulterous  and  anti- 
christian,  from  S.  Gregory  to  Wicliffe — whom  Beza 
considers  the  first  restorer  of  Christianity.  Calvin 
indeed  would  shield  himself  under  a  distinction,  saying 
that  the  Church  can  err  in  things  unnecessary  for 
salvation,  not  in  others.  But  Beza  openly  confesses 
that  she  has  so  far  erred  that  she  is  no  longer  the 
Church.  And  is  this  not  to  err  in  things  necessary 
for  salvation,  although  he  avows  that  outside  the 
Church  there  is  no  salvation  ?  It  follows  then  from 
what  he  says — let  him  turn  and  turn  about  as  he 
likes — that  the  Church  has  erred  in  things  necessary 
for  salvation.  For  if  outside  the  Church  there  is  no 
salvation,  and  the  Church  has  so  gravely  erred  that 
she  is  no  more  the  Church,  certainly  in  her  there  is 
no  salvation.  Now  she  can  only  lose  salvation  by 
giving  up  the  things  necessary  for  salvation ;  she  has 
therefore  erred  in  things  necessary  for  salvation ;  other- 
wise, having  what  is  necessary  for  salvation,  she  would 
be  the  true  Church,  or  else  men  can  be  saved  outside 
the  true  Church,  which  is  impossible.  And  Beza  says 
that  he  learnt  this  way  of  speaking  from  those  who 
instructed  him  in  his  pretended  religion,  that  is,  from 
Calvin.     Indeed  if  Calvin  thought  that  the  Church  of 

CHAP.  XIII.]  Mission.  75 

Eome  had  not  erred  in  things  necessary  for  salvation 
he  would  have  done  wrong  to  separate  himself  from  it, 
for  being  able  to  secure  his  salvation  in  it,  and  true 
Christianity  residing  in  it,  he  would  have  been  obliged 
to  stay  therein  for  his  salvation,  which  could  not  be  in 
two  different  places. 

Perhaps  I  may  be  told  that  Beza  says  indeed  that 
the  Eoman  Church,  as  it  is  now,  errs  in  things  neces- 
sary for  salvation,  and  that  therefore  he  left  it ;  but 
that  he  does  not  say  the  true  Church  has  ever  erred. 
He  cannot,  however,  escape  in  that  direction  ;  for  what 
Church  was  there  in  the  world  two,  three,  four,  five 
hundred  years  ago,  save  the  Church  Catholic  and 
Eoman,  just  exactly  as  it  is  at  present  ?  There  was 
certainly  no  other,  therefore  it  was  the  true  Church — 
and  yet  it  erred ;  or  there  was  no  Church  in  the  world 
— and  in  that  case  asfain  he  is  constrained  to  confess 
that  this  disappearance  of  the  Church  arose  from  in- 
tolerable error,  and  error  in  things  necessary  for  salva- 
tion. For  as  to  that  dispersion  of  the  faithful,  and 
that  secret  Church  that  he  fancies  he  can  bring 
forward,  I  have  already  sufficiently  exposed  the  vain- 
ness of  it.  Besides  the  fact  that  when  they  confess 
the  visible  Church  can  err,  they  dishonour  the  Church 
to  which  Our  Lord  directs  us  in  our  difficulties,  and 
which  S.  Paul  calls  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth. 
For  it  is  only  of  the  visible  Church  that  these  testi- 
monies are  understood,  unless  we  would  say  that  Our 
Lord  had  sent  us  to  speak  to  an  invisible  and  unper- 
ceivable  thing,  a  thing  utterly  unknown,  or  that  S. 
Paul  instructed  his  Timothy  to  converse  in  a  society 
of  which  he  had  no  knowledge. 

But  is  it  not  to  violate  all  the  respect  and  reverence 

76  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

due  to  this  Queen,  this  spouse  of  the  heavenly  King,  to 
have  brought  back  into  the  realm  almost  all  the  rout 
which  with  such  cost  of  blood,  of  sweat,  and  of 
travails,  she  had  by  solemn  penal  sentence  banished 
and  driven  from  these  her  confines,  as  rebels  and  as 
sworn  enemies  of  her  crown  ?  I  mean  this  setting 
up  so  many  heresies  and  false  opinions  which  the 
Church  had  condemned,  infringing  thereby  the  sove- 
reignty of  the  Church,  absolving  those  she  had  con- 
demned, condemning  those  whom  she  has  absolved. 
Examples  follow. 

Simon  Magus  said  that  God  was  the  cause  of  sin, 
says  Vincent  of  Lerins  (Com.  i""*  c.  24).  But 
Calvin  and  Beza  say  no  less ;  the  former  in  the 
treatise  on  eternal  predestination,  the  latter  in  his 
answer  to  Sebastian  Castalio  i''*"  though  they  deny  the 
word,  they  follow  the  things  and  substance  of  this 
heresy, — if  heresy  it  is  to  be  called,  and  not  atheism. 
But  of  this  so  many  learned  men  convict  them  by 
their  own  words  that  I  will  not  stay  upon  it. 

Judas,  says  S.  Jerome  (in  Matt.  xxvi.  48),  thought 
that  the  miracles  he  saw  worked  by  the  hand  of  Our 
Lord  were  diabolical  operations  and  illusions.t  I  know 
not  whether  your  ministers  think  of  what  they  are  say- 
ing, but  when  we  bring  forward  miracles,  what  do  they 
say  but  that  they  are  sorceries  ?  The  glorious  miracles 
which  Our  Lord  does,  0  men  of  this  world,  instead  of 
opening  your  eyes,  how  do  you  speak  of  them  ?  | 

*  See  Claude  de  Sainctes  on  Atheism ;  Francis  Feuardent  in  liig 
Dialogues ;  Bellarmine  Controv.  Tom.  iv.  Lib.  ii.  c.  6  [where  find  quota- 
tions from  Calvin  and  Beza.  Tr.] ;  Hay  in  his  (Questions  and  Answers. 

t  Porphyry  and  Eunomius  did  the  same.    See  Jerome  adv.  Vig.  (lo). 

X  See  Calvin  in  Pref.  to  Instit.  ;  the  Ceuturiators ;  Peter  Martyr 
(c.  viii.  Jud.). 

CHAP.  XI.]  Mission,  "jj 

The  Pepusians,  says  S.  Augustine  *  (or  Montanists 
and  Phrygians,  as  the  Code  calls  them),  admitted 
women  to  the  dignity  of  the  priesthood.  Who  is 
ignorant  that  the  English  brethren  hold  their  Queen 
Elizabeth  to  be  head  of  their  Church  ? 

The  Manicheans,  says  S.  Jerome,  t  denied  free- 
will :  Luther  has  composed  a  book  against  free-will, 
which  he  calls  de  servo  arhitrio  :  for  Calvin  I  appeal 
to  yourselves.J 

The  Donatists  believed  that  the  Church  was  de- 
stroyed throughout  the  world  and  remained  only 
with  them  (Aug.  de  Ecer.  69) :  your  ministers  say  the 
same.  Again,  they  believe  that  a  bad  man  cannot 
uaptize  (lb.  contra  Pet.  i.  i);  Wiclifi'  said  just  as 
much,  whom  I  bring  forward  in  mockery,  because 
Beza  holds  him  for  a  glorious  reformer.  As  to  their 
lives,  their  virtues  were  such  as  these :  they  gave  the 
most  precious  Sacrament  to  the  dogs,  they  cast  the 
holy  Chrism  upon  the  ground,  they  overthrew  the 
altars,  broke  the  chalices  and  sold  then,  they  shaved 
the  heads  of  the  priests  to  take  the  sacred  unction  from 
them,  they  took  and  tore  away  the  veil  from  nuns  to 
degrade  them.§ 

Jovinian,  as  S.  Augustine  testifies,  ||  would  have  any 
kind  of  meat  eaten  at  any  time  and  against  every 
prohibition ;  he  said  that  fasting  was  not  meritorious 
before  God,  that  the  saved  were  equal  in  glory,  that 

*  De  Hcer.  27.  f  Prsef.  in  Dial.  c.  Pelag. 

t  The  Saint  adds  in  marginal  note  :  Amb.  Ep.  83  (Migne  Ep.  xxiii. ) : 
'*  "We  rightly  condemn  the  Manicheans  on  account  of  their  Sunday 

§  See  Optatus  de  sch.  Don.  ii.  17,  vi,  i. 

II  De  Hcer.  82  :  and  see  Jerome  cont.  Jov. 

"j^f  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  i. 

virginity  was  no  better  than  marriage,  and  that  all 
sins  were  equal.     Your  masters  teach  the  same. 

Vigilantius,  as  S.  Jerome  says,""''  denied  that  the 
relics  of  the  Saints  are  to  be  honoured,  that  the  prayers 
of  the  Saints  are  profitable,  that  priests  should  live  in 
celibacy ;  [he  rejected]  voluntary  poverty.  And  what 
of  all  those  things  do  you  not  deny  ?  t 

About  the  year  324,  Eustathius  despised  the  ordi- 
nary fasts  of  the  Church,  ecclesiastical  traditions,  the 
shrines  of  the  holy  Martyrs,  and  places  dedicated  to 
their  honour.  The  account  is  given  by  the  Council 
of  Gangra  (m  'prcef)  in  which  for  these  reasons  he  was 
anathematized  and  condemned.  See  how  long  your 
reformers  have  been  condemned. 

Eunomius  would  not  yield  to  plurality,  dignity, 
antiquity,  as  S.  Basil  testifies.|  He  said  that  faith 
alone  was  sufficient  for  salvation,  and  justified  (Aug. 
licer.  54).  As  to  the  first  point,  see  Beza  in  his 
treatise  on  the  marks  of  the  Church ;  as  to  the  second, 
does  it  not  agree  with  that  celebrated  sentence  of 
Luther's,  §  whom  Beza  holds  to  be  a  most  glorious 
reformer :  "  You  see  how  rich  is  the  Christian,  that  is, 
the  baptized  man,  who  even  if  he  wishes  is  not  able 
to  lose  his  salvation  by  any  sins  whatever,  unless  he 
refuses  to  believe  "  ? 

Aerius,  according  to  S.  Augustine  (H.  53),  denied 
prayer  for  the  dead,  ordinary  fasts,  and  the  superiority 
of  a  bishop  over  a  simple  priest.  Your  masters  deny 
all  this. 

*  Cont.  Vig.  ;  and  Ep.  ii.  adv.  eundem. 

t  For  this  and  preceding  paragraph  the  Saint  refers  to  Luther  (da 
Nat.  B.M.  ;  in  i  Pet.  Ep.  ;  and  Epithal)  ;  and  Calvin  {in  Antid. 
S.  vi.). 

+  Contra  Eun.  i.  §  de  Cap.  Bah.  1. 

CHAP.  XIII.]  Mission.  79 

Lucifer  called  his  Church  alone  the  true  Church 
and  said  that  the  ancient  Church  had  become,  instead 
of  a  Church,  a  house  of  ill-fame : "''"  and  what  do  your 
ministers  cry  out  all  the  day  ? 

The  Pelagians  considered  themselves  assured  and 
certain  of  their  justice,  promised  salvation  to  the 
children  of  the  faithful  who  died  without  Baptism, 
held  that  all  sins  were  mortal.t  As  to  the  first,  this 
is  your  ordinary  language,  and  that  of  Calvin  (m 
Antidoto,  p.  vi.).  The  second  and  third  points  are  too 
ordinary  with  you  to  have  anything  said  about  them. 

The  Manicheans  rejected  the  sacrifices  of  the 
Church,  and  images,^  as  your  people  also  do. 

The  Messalians  despised  Sacred  Orders,  Churches, 
Altars,  as  says  S.  Damascene  (Hseres.  80) ;  and  S. 
Ignatius  says :  §  They  do  not  admit  the  Eucharist 
and  the  oblations,  because  they  do  not  acknowledge 
the  Eucharist  to  be  the  flesh  of  our  Saviour,  Jesus 
Christ,  which  suffered  for  our  sins,  which  the  Father 
mercifully  raised  up.  Against  whom  S.  Martial  has 
written.  || 

Berengarius  taught  the  same,  long  afterwards,  and 
was  condemned  by  three  Councils,  in  the  two  last  of 
which  he  abjured  his  heresy. 

Julian  the  Apostate  despised  the  sign  of  the  cross. 
Xenaias  did  the  same,1[  the  Mahometans  treat  it  no 
worse.**  But  he  who  would  see  this  at  full  length, 
let  him  look  at  Sanders   (viii.  5  7)  and  Bellarmine  in 

*  Jer.  contra  Lucif. 

t  Jerome  adv.  Pel.  ii.  and  iii.  ;  S.  Aug.  contra  Jul.  vi. 

X  S.  Aug.  contra  Faustum  xx. 

§  Apud  Theodoret.  Dial.  3,  called  ImpatibUis. 

II  Epist.  ad  Burdigalenses  (apocryphal  Tr.). 

IF  Niceph.  xvi.  27.  **  Damas.  100. 

8o  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  i. 

his  Notes  of  the  Church.  Do  you  see  the  mould  on 
which  your  ministers  lay  and  form  their  reformation  ? 
JSTow,  ought  not  this  agreement  of  opinions,  or,  to 
speak  more  rightly,  this  close  parentage  and  consan- 
guinity which  your  first  masters  had  with  the  most 
cruel,  inveterate,  and  sworn  enemies  of  the  Church, — 
ought  not  this  alone  to  dissuade  you  from  following 
them,  and  to  bring  you  under  the  right  banner  ?  I 
have  not  cited  one  heresy  which  was  not  held  as  such 
by  that  Church  which  Calvin  and  Beza  confess  to 
have  been  the  true  Church, — that  is,  in  the  first  five 
hundred  years  of  Christianity.  Ah !  I  pray  you,  is  it 
not  to  trample  the  majesty  of  the  Church  under  foot 
thus  to  produce  as  reformations,  and  necessary  and  holy 
reparations,  what  she  has  so  greatly  abominated  when 
she  was  in  her  purest  years,  and  which  she  had 
crushed  down  as  impiety,  as  the  ruin  and  corruption  of 
true  doctrine  ?  The  delicate  stomach  of  this  heavenly 
Spouse  had  scarcely  been  able  to  bear  the  violence  of 
these  poisons,  and  had  rejected  them  with  such  energy 
that  many  veins  of  her  martyrs  had  burst  with  the 
effort,  and  now  you  offer  them  to  her  again  as  a 
precious  medicine !  The  Fathers  whom  I  have  quoted 
would  never  have  placed  them  on  the  list  of  heretics 
if  they  had  not  seen  the  body  of  the  Church  hold  them 
as  such.  These  Fathers  being  in  the  highest  rank  of 
orthodoxy,  and  closely  united  with  all  the  other  Catholic 
bishops  and  doctors  of  their  time,  we  see  that  what 
they  held  to  be  heretical  was  so  in  reality.  Picture 
to  yourselves  this  venerable  antiquity  in  heaven  round 
about  the  Master,  who  regards  your  reformers  and 
their  works.  Those  have  gained  their  crown  com- 
batting the  opinions  which  the  ministers  adore;  they 

CHAP,  xiil]  Mission.  8i 

have  held  as  heretics  those  whose  steps  you  follow. 
Do  you  think  that  what  they  have  judged  to  be  error, 
heresy,  blasphemy,  in  the  Arians,  the  Manichteans, 
Judas,  they  now  judge  to  be  sanctity,  reformation, 
restoration  ?  Who  sees  not  that  this  is  the  greatest 
contempt  for  the  majesty  of  the  Church  that  can  be 
shown  ?  If  you  would  be  in  the  succession  of  the 
true  and  holy  Church  of  those  first  centuries,  do  not 
then  oppose  what  it  has  so  solemnly  established  and 
instituted.  Nobody  can  be  partly  heir  and  partly  not. 
Accept  the  inheritance  courageously ;  the  charges  are 
not  so  great  but  that  a  little  humility  will  give  a  good 
account  of  them — to  say  good-bye  to  your  passions, 
and  to  give  up  the  difference  which  you  have  with 
the  Church  :  the  honours  are  infinite — the  being  heirs 
of  God,  co-heirs  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  happy  society 
of  all  the  Blessed  ! 


PART  11. 
Zhc  IRule  of  Jfattb. 


If  the  advice  which  St.  John  ^  gives  to  Christians, 
not  to  believe  every  spirit,  was  ever  necessary,  it  is  so 
now  more  than  ever,  when  so  many  different  and  con- 
trary spirits  in  Christendom  demand  belief,  on  the 
strength  of  the  Word  of  God ;  in  whose  name  we 
have  seen  so  many  nations  run  astray  in  every  direc- 
tion, each  one  after  its  humour.  As  the  common 
sort  admire  comets  and  wandering  fires,  and  believe 
that  they  are  true  stars  and  bright  planets,  while 
better-informed  people  know  well  that  they  are  only 
airy  flames  which  float  over  some  vapour  as  long  as 
there  is  anything  to  feed  them,  which  always  leave 
some  ill  effect  behind  them,  and  which  have  nothing 
in  common  with  the  incorruptible  stars  save  the 
coarse  light  which  makes  them  visible ;  so  the  miser- 
able people  of  our  age,  seeing  in  certain  foolish  men 
the  glitter  of  human  subtlety  and  a  false  gleam  of 
the  Word  of  God,  have  believed  that  here  were 
heavenly    truths,    and    have    given    heed    to    them ; 

*  I  Ep.  iv.  I. 

iNTROD.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  83 

although  men  of  worth  and  judgment  testified  that 
they  were  only  earthly  inventions,  which  would  in 
time  disappear,  nor  leave  other  memorial  of  them 
than  the  sense  of  the  many  miseries  which  follow. 
0  how  men  ought  to  have  abstained  from  giving 
themselves  up  to  these  spirits,  and  before  following 
them  to  have  tried  whether  they  were  of  God  or  no ! 
Ah !  there  is  not  wanting  a  touchstone  to  distinguish 
the  base  metal  of  their  counterfeits.  For  he  who 
caused  us  to  be  told  that  we  must  'prove  the  spirits, 
would  not  have  done  so  unless  he  knew  that  we 
had  infallible  rules  to  tell  the  holy  from  the  false 
spirit.  We  have  such  rules,  and  nobody  denies  it. 
But  these  deceivers  produce  rules  which  they  can 
falsify  and  adapt  to  their  pretensions,  in  order  that, 
having  rules  in  their  hands,  they  may  gain  the  credit 
of  being  masters  in  their  craft  by  a  visible  sign 
under  pretext  of  which  they  can  form  a  faith  and  a 
religion  such  as  they  have  imagined.  It  is  then  of 
the  most  extreme  importance  to  know  what  are  the 
true  rules  of  our  belief,  for  thereby  we  can  easily 
discern  heresy  from  the  true  religion :  and  this  is 
what  I  intend  to  make  clear  in  this  Second  Part.  My 
plan  is  as  follows. 

The  Christian  faith  is  grounded  on  the  Word  of 
God.  This  is  what  places  it  in  the  sovereign  degree 
of  certainty,  as  having  the  warrant  of  that  eternal 
and  infallible  Truth.  Faith  which  rests  on  anything 
else  is  not  Christian.  Therefore,  the  Word  of  God 
is  the  true  rule  of  right-believing,  as  ground  and  rule 
are  in  this  case  one  and  the  same  thing. 

Since  this  rule  does  not  regulate  our  faith  save 
when  it  is  applied,  proposed  and  declared,  and  since 

84  T^he  Catholic  Co7ttroversy,        [part.  ii. 

this  may  be  done  well  or  ill, — therefore  it  is  not 
enough  to  know  that  the  Word  of  God  is  the  true 
and  infallible  rule  of  right-believing,  unless  I  know 
what  Word  is  God's,  where  it  is,  who  has  to  propose, 
apply,  and  declare  it.  It  is  useless  for  me  to  know 
that  the  Word  of  God  is  infallible,  and  for  all  this 
knowledge  I  shall  not  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ, 
Son  of  the  living  God,  unless  I  am  certified  that  this 
Word  is  revealed  by  the  heavenly  Eather :  and  even 
when  I  come  to  know  this  I  shall  not  be  out  of 
doubt  if  I  do  not  know  how  this  is  to  be  understood, 
— whether  of  an  adoptive  filiation  in  the  Arian  sense, 
or  a  natural  filiation  in  the  Catholic. 

There  is  need,  then,  besides  this  first  and  funda- 
mental rule  the  Word  of  God,  of  another,  a  second 
rule,  by  which  the  first  may  be  rightly  and  duly 
proposed,  applied,  and  declared.  And  in  order  that 
we  may  not  be  subject  to  hesitation  and  uncertainty, 
it  is  necessary  not  only  that  the  first  rule,  namely, 
the  Word  of  God,  but  also  the  second,  which  pro- 
poses and  applies  this  rule,  be  absolutely  infallible  ; 
otherwise  we  shall  always  remain  in  suspense  and 
in  doubt  as  to  whether  we  are  not  being  badly 
directed  and  supported  in  our  faith  and  belief,  not 
now  by  any  defect  in  the  first  rule,  but  by  error 
and  defect  in  the  proposition  and  application  thereof. 
Certainly  the  danger  is  equal, — either  of  getting  out 
of  rule  for  want  of  a  right  rule,  or  getting  out  of  rule 
for  want  of  a  regular  and  right  application  of  the  rule 
itself.  But  this  infallibility  which  is  required  as  well 
in  the  rule  as  in  its  application,  can  have  its  source 
only  in  God,  the  living  and  original  fountain  of  all 
truth.     Let  us  proceed. 

iNTROD.]  The  Rtde  of  Faith.  85 

Now  as  God  revealed  his  Word,  and  spoke,  or 
preached,  by  the  mouth  of  the  Fathers  and  Prophets, 
and  at  last  by  his  own  Son,  then  by  the  Apostles 
and  Evangelists,  whose  tongues  were  but  as  the  pens 
of  scribes  writing  rapidly,  God  thus  employing  men 
to  speak  to  men ;  so  to  propose,  apply,  and  declare 
this  his  Word,  he  employs  his  visible  Spouse  as  his 
mouthpiece  and  the  interpreter  of  his  intentions.  It 
is  God  then  who  rules  over  Christian  belief,  but  with 
two  instruments,  in  a  double  way  :  (i)  by  his  Word 
as  by  a  formal  rule ;  (2)  by  his  Church  as  by  the  hand 
of  the  measurer  and  rule-user.  Let  us  put  it  thus : 
God  is  the  painter,  our  faith  the  picture,  the  colours 
are  the  Word  of  God,  the  brush  is  the  Church.  Here 
then  are  two  ordinary  and  infallible  rules  of  our 
belief :  the  Word  of  God,  which  is  the  fundamental 
and  formal  rule;  the  Church  of  God,  which  is  the 
rule  of  application  and  explanation. 

I  consider  in  this  second  part  both  the  one  and  the 
other,  but  to  make  my  exposition  of  them  more  clear 
and  more  easy  to  handle,  I  have  divided  these  two 
rules  into  several,  as  follows. 

The  Word  of  God,  the  formal  rule  of  our  faith,  is 
either  in  Scripture  or  in  Tradition.  I  treat  first  of 
Scripture,  then  of  Tradition. 

The  Church,  the  rule  of  application,  expresses  her- 
self either  in  her  universal  body  by  a  general  belief 
of  all  Christians,  or  in  her  principal  and  nobler  parts 
by  a  consent  of  her  pastors  and  doctors ;  and  in  this 
latter  way  it  is  either  in  her  pastors  assembled  in  one 
place  and  at  one  time,  as  in  a  general  council,  or  in 
her  pastors  divided  as  to  place  and  time,  but  assembled 
in  union  and  correspondence  of  faith ;  or,  in  fine,  this 

86  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [paet  h. 

same  Church  expresses  herself  and  speaks  by  her  head- 
minister.'"'  And  these  are  four  explaining  and  apply- 
ing rules  of  our  faith ; — the  Church  as  a  whole,  the 
General  Council,  the  consent  of  the  Fathers,  the  Pope. 

Other  rules  than  these  we  are  not  to  seek ;  these 
are  enough  to  steady  the  most  inconstant.  But  God, 
who  takes  pleasure  in  the  abundance  of  his  favours, 
wishing  to  come  to  the  help  of  the  weakness  of  men, 
goes  so  far  as  to  add  sometimes  to  these  ordinary 
rules  (I  refer  to  the  establishment  and  founding  of  the 
Church)  an  extraordinary  rule,  most  certain  and  of 
great  importance, — namely,  miracles — an  extraordinary 
testimony  of  the  true  application  of  the  Divine  Word. 

Lastly,  natural  reason  may  also  be  called  a  rule  of 
right-believing,  but  negatively  and  not  affirmatively. 
For  if  any  one  should  speak  thus :  such  a  proposition 
is  an  article  of  faith,  therefore  it  is  according  to 
natural  reason : — this  affirmative  consequence  would 
be  badly  drawn,  since  almost  all  our  faith  is  outside 
of  and  above  our  reason.  But  if  he  were  to  say :  this 
is  an  article  of  faith,  therefore  it  cannot  be  against 
natural  reason  : — the  consequence  is  good.  For  natural 
reason  and  faith,  being  supported  on  the  same  prin- 
ciples, and  starting  from  one  same  author,  cannot  be 
contrary  to  each  other. 

Here  then  are  eight  rules  of  faith  :  Scripture,  Tradi- 
tion, the  Church,  Councils,  the  Fathers,  the  Pope, 
miracles,  natural  reason.  The  two  first  are  only  a 
formal  rule,  the  four  following  are  only  a  rule  of  appli- 
cation, the  seventh  is  extraordinary,  and  the  eighth 
negative.     Or,  he  who  would  reduce  all  these  rules  to 

*  CTief  ministeriel.    That  is,  ruler  of  the  Church,  but  ruling  as  prime 
minister  of  Christ.     [Tr.] 

ART.  1. 0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  87 

a  single  one,  would  say  that  the  sole  and  true  rule  of 
right- believing  is  the  Word  of  God  preached  by  the 
Church  of  God. 

Now  I  undertake  here  to  show,  as  clearly  as  the 
light  of  day,  that  your  reformers  have  violated  and 
forced  all  these  rules  (and  it  would  be  enough  to  show 
that  they  have  violated  one  of  them,  since  they  are 
so  closely  connected  that  he  who  violates  one  violates 
all  the  others) ;  in  order  that,  as  you  have  seen  in  the 
first  part,  that  they  have  taken  you  out  of  the  bosom 
of  the  true  Church  by  schism,  so  you  may  know  in 
this  second  part,  that  they  have  deprived  you  of  the 
light  of  the  true  faith  by  heresy,  to  drag  you  after 
their  illusions.  And  I  keep  ever  in  the  same  posi- 
tion :  for  I  prove  firstly  that  the  rules  which  I  bring 
forward  are  most  certain  and  infallible,  then  I  prove, 
so  closely  that  you  can  touch  it  with  your  hand,  that 
your  doctors  have  violated  them.  Here  now  I  appeal 
to  you  in  the  name  of  the  Almighty  God,  and  summon 
you  on  his  part,  to  judge  justly. 







I  WELL  know,  thank  God,  that  Tradition  was  before 
all  Scripture,  since  a  good  part  of  Scripture  itself  is 

SS  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  n. 

only  Tradition  reduced  to  writing,  with  an  infallible 
assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But,  since  the  authority 
of  Scripture  is  more  easily  received  by  the  reformers 
than  that  of  Tradition,  I  begin  with  the  former  in 
order  to  get  a  better  entrance  for  my  argument. 

Holy  Scripture  is  in  such  sort  the  rule  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith  that  we  are  obliged  by  every  kind  of  obliga- 
tion to  believe  most  exactly  all  that  it  contains,  and 
not  to  believe  anything  which  may  be  ever  so  little 
contrary  to  it:  for  if  Our.  Lord  himself  has  sent  the 
Jews  to  it  '^  to  strengthen  their  faith,  it  must  be  a 
most  safe  standard.  The  Sadducees  erred  because 
they  did  not  understand  the  Scriptures ;  t  they  would 
have  done  better  to  attend  to  them,  as  to  a  light 
shining  in  a  dark  place,  according  to  the  advice  of 
S.  Peter,J  who  having  himself  heard  the  voice  of  the 
Father  in  the  Transfiguration  of  the  Son,  bases  himself 
more  firmly  on  the  testimony  of  the  Prophets  than  on 
this  experience.  When  God  says  to  Josue :  Let  not 
the  hook  of  this  law  depart  from  thy  month^  he  shows 
clearly  tliat  he  willed  him  to  have  it  always  in  his 
mind,  and  to  let  no  persuasion  enter  which  should  be 
contrary  to  it.  But  I  am  losing  time ;  this  disputa- 
tion would  be  needful  against  free-thinkers  {les  Liher- 
tins) ;  we  are  agreed  on  this  point,  and  those  who  are 
so  mad  as  to  contradict  it,  can  only  rest  their  contra- 
diction on  the  Scripture  itself,  contradicting  themselves 
before  contradicting  the  Scripture,  using  it  in  the  very 
protestation  which  they  make  that  they  will  not 
use  it. 

*  John  V.  39.  t  Mark  xii.  24.  X  ^V'  2,  i-  i9-  §  Jos.  i.  8. 

ART.  I.  c.  II.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  89 



On  this  point,  again,  I  will  scarcely  delay.  Tiie  Holy 
Scripture  is  called  the  Book  of  the  Old  and  of  the  New 
Testament.  When  a  notary  has  drawn  a  contract  or 
other  deed,  when  a  testament  is  confirmed  by  the 
death  of  the  testator,  there  must  not  be  added,  with- 
drawn, or  altered,  one  single  word  under  penalty  of 
falsification.  Are  not  the  Holy  Scriptures  the  true 
testament  of  the  eternal  God,  drawn  by  the  notaries 
deputed  for  this  purpose,  duly  sealed  and  signed  with 
his  blood,  confirmed  by  death  ?  Being  such,  how  can 
we  alter  even  the  smallest  point  without  impiety  ? 
"A  testament,"  says  the  great  Ulpian,  "is  a  just 
expression  of  our  will  as  to  what  we  would  have  done 
after  our  death."  '^  Our  Lord  by  the  Holy  Scriptures 
shows  us  what  we  must  believe,  hope  for,  love,  and  do, 
and  this  by  a  true  expression  of  his  will ;  if  we  add, 
take  away,  or  change,  it  will  no  longer  be  the  true 
expression  of  God's  will.  For  our  Lord  having  duly 
expressed  in  Scripture  his  will,  if  we  add  anything  of 
our  own  we  shall  make  the  statement  go  beyond  the 
will  of  the  testator,  if  we  take  anything  away  we  shall 
make  it  fall  short,  if  we  make  changes  in  it  we  shall 
set  it  awry,  and  it  will  no  longer  correspond  to  the 
will  of  the  author,  nor  be  a  correct  statement.  When 
two  things  exactly  correspond,  he  who  changes  the  one 
destroys  the  equality  and  the  correspondence  between 
them.     If  it  be  a  true  statement,  whatever  right  have 

*  Test.  i.  IT.     Qai  tc&t.  facere  posmnt. 

90  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

we  to  alter  it  ?  Our  Lord  puts  a  value  on  the  iotas, 
yea,  the  mere  little  points  and  accents  of  his  holy 
words.  How  jealous  then  is  he  of  their  integrity,  and 
what  punishment  shall  they  not  deserve  who  violate 
this  integrity  !  Brethren^  says  S.  Paul  *  (/  s]peak  after 
the  manner  of  man),  yet  a  man's  testament^  if  it  he  con- 
firmed, no  man  despiseth,  nor  addeth  to  it.  And  to 
show  how  important  it  is  to  learn  the  Scripture  in  its 
exactness  he  gives  an  example.  To  Abraham  were  the 
promises  made,  and  to  his  seed.  He  says  not  and  to  his 
seeds  as  of  many,  hut  as  of  one  ;  and  to  thy  seed,  who  is 
Christ.  See,  I  beg  you,  how  the  change  from  singular 
to  plural  would  have  spoilt  the  mysterious  meaning  of 
this  word. 

The  Ephrathites  [Ephraimites]  said  Sibolleth,  not 
forgetting  a  single  letter,  but  because  they  did  not 
pronounce  it  thickly  enough,  the  Galaadites  slew  them 
at  the  fords  of  Jordan.t  The  simple  difference  of 
pronunciation  in  speaking,  and  in  writing  the  mere 
transposition  of  one  single  point  on  the  letter  sdn 
caused  the  ambiguity,  and  changing  the  janin  into 
semol,  instead  of  an  ear  of  wheat  expressed  a  weight 
or  a  burden.  Whosoever  alters  or  adds  the  slightest 
accent  in  the  Scripture  is  a  sacrilegious  man,  and 
deserves  the  death  of  him  who  dares  to  mingle  the 
profane  with  the  sacred. 

The  Arians,  as  S.  Augustine  tells  us,J  corrupted  this 
sentence  of  S.  John  i.  i  :  In  priiicipio  erat  verhum,  et 
verhum  erat  apiid  JDeum,  et  Deus  erat  verhum.  Hoc 
erat  in  princijno  apud  Deum :  by  simply  changing  a 
point.     For  they  read  it  thus :  M  verhum  erat  apiui 

*  Gal.  iii.  15,  1 6.  t  Judges  xii.  6. 

t  De  doc.  Chris,  iii.  2. 

AETi.  0.  III.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  91 

Deum  et  Deios  erect  Verbum  hoc,  &c. :  instead  of : 
Deus  erat  verbum.  Hoc  erat  in  principio  apud  Deum  : 
They  placed  the  full  stop  after  the  erat,  instead  of 
after  the  verbum.  They  so  acted  for  fear  of  having  to 
grant  that  the  Word  was  God ;  so  little  is  required  to 
change  the  sense  of  God's  Word.  When  one  is  hand- 
ling glass  beads,  if  two  or  three  are  lost,  it  is  a  small 
matter,  but  if  they  were  oriental  pearls  the  loss  would 
be  great.  The  better  the  wine  the  more  it  suffers  from 
the  mixture  of  a  foreign  flavour,  and  the  exquisite  sym- 
metry of  a  great  picture  will  not  bear  the  admixture 
of  new  colours.  Such  is  the  conscientiousness  with 
which  we  ought  to  regard  and  handle  the  sacred 
deposit  of  the  Scriptures. 



The  Council  of  Trent  gives  these  books  as  sacred, 
divine  and  canonical :  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josue,  Judges,  Ruth,  the  four 
Books  of  Kings,  two  of  Paralipomenon,  two  of  Esdras 
(a  first,  and  a  second  which  is  called  of  Nehemias), 
Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  Job,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Psalms  of  David,  Proverbs,  Fcclesiastes,  the  Canticle 
of  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Isaias,  Jeremias 
with  Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel,  Osee,  Joel,  Amos, 
Abdias,  Jonas,  Micheas,  Nahum,  Habacuc,  Sophonias, 
Aggeus,  Zacharias,  Malachy,  two  of  Machabees,  first 
and  second :  of  the  New  Testament,  four  Gospels, — S. 

92  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  il 

Matthew,  S.  Mark,  S.  Luke,  S.  John, — the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  by  S.  Luke,  fourteen  Epistles  of  S.  Paul, — to 
the  Eomans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  to  the  Galatians, 
to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians,  to  the  Colossians, 
two  to  the  Thessalonians,  two  to  Timothy,  to  Titus,  to 
Philemon,  to  the  Hebrews, — two  of  S.  Peter,  three  of 
S.  John,  one  of  S.  James,  one  of  S.  Jude,  and  the 
Apocalypse.  The  same  books  were  received  at  the 
Council  of  Florence,  and  long  before  that,  at  the  third 
Council  of  Carthage  about  twelve  hundred  years  ago. 

These  books  are  divided  into  two  ranks.  For  of 
some,  both  of  the  Old  and  of  the  New  Testament,  it 
was  never  doubted  but  that  they  were  sacred  and 
canonical :  others  there  are  about  whose  authority  the 
ancient  Fathers  doubted  for  a  time,  but  afterwards 
they  were  placed  with  those  of  the  first  rank. 

Those  of  the  first  rank  in  the  Old  Testament  are : 
the  five  of  Moses,  Josue,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  of  Kings, 
two  of  Paralipomenon,  two  of  Esdras  and  JSTehemias, 
Job,  one  hundred  and  fifty  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Eccle- 
siastes.  Canticles,  the  four  greater  Prophets,  the  twelve 
lesser  Prophets.  These  were  formed  into  the  canon 
by  the  great  synod  at  which  Esdras  was  present,  and 
to  which  he  was  scribe ;  and  no  one  ever  doubted  of 
their  authority  without  being  at  once  considered  a 
heretic,  as  our  learned  Genebrard  fully  proves  in  his 
Chronology.*  The  second  rank  contains  the  following  : 
Esther,  Baruch,  a  part  of  Daniel  (the  history  of  Susanna, 
the  Canticle  of  the  Three  Children,  and  the  history  of 
the  death  of  the  dragon  in  the  fourteenth  chapter), 
Tobias,  Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Machabees  i 
and   2.      And  as  to  these  there  is  a  great  probability 

*  Ad  anu.  3638. 

ART.  1. 0.  III.  J  The  Rule  of  Faith.  93 

in  the  opinion  of  the  same  Doctor  Genebrard  *  that  in 
the  meeting  which  was  held  at  Jerusalem  to  send  the 
seventy-two  interpreters  into  Egypt,  these  books, 
which  were  not  in  existence  when  Esdras  made  the 
first  canon,  were  placed  on  the  canon,  at  least  tacitly, 
because  they  were  sent  with  the  others  to  be  translated, 
except  the  Machabees,  which  were  received  in  another 
meeting  afterwards,  wherein  the  preceding  were  again 
approved.  But  however  the  case  may  be,  as  the 
second  canon  was  not  made  so  authentically  as  the 
first,  this  placing  on  the  canon  could  not  procure  them 
an  entire  and  unquestionable  authority  among  the 
Jews,  nor  make  them  equal  with  the  books  of  the 
first  rank. 

Coming  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  I  say 
that  in  the  same  way  there  are  some  of  the  first  rank, 
which  have  always  been  acknowledged  and  received 
as  sacred  and  canonical.  These  are  the  four  Gospels, 
S.  Matthew,  S.  Mark,  S.  Luke,  S.  John,  all  the  Epistles 
of  S.  Paul  except  that  to  the  Hebrews,  one  of  S. 
Peter,  one  of  S.  John.  Those  of  the  second  rank 
are  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  that  of  S.  James, 
the  second  of  S.  Peter,  the  second  and  third  of  S. 
John,  that  of  S.  Jude,  the  i6th  chapter  of  S.  Mark, 
as  S.  Jerome  says,  and  S.  Luke's  history  of  the 
bloody  sweat  of  Our  Lord  in  the  garden  of  Olives, 
according  to  the  same  S.  Jerome ;  in  the  eighth 
chapter  of  S.  John  there  has  been  a  doubt  concerning 
the  history  of  the  woman  taken  in  adultery,  or  at 
least  some  suspect  that  it  has  been  doubted,  and 
concerning    verse    seven    of    the    last    chapter   of    S. 

*  lb.  seqq.  et  ad  aim.  3860.     He  quotes  S.  Epiph.,  de  mens,  et  pond., 
and  Josephus,  contra  App.  ii.     S.  Epiph.  speaks  only  of  Baruch. 

94  TJ^^  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  h. 

John's  First  Epistle.  These  are,  as  far  as  we  know, 
the  books  and  parts  of  books  concerning  which  it 
appears  there  was  anciently  some  doubt.  And  these 
were  not  of  undoubted  authority  in  the  Church  at 
first,  but  as  time  went  on  they  were  at  length  recog- 
nised as  the  sacred  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  not 
all  at  once  but  at  different  times.  And  first,  besides 
those  of  the  first  rank,  whether  of  the  new  or  of  the 
Old  Testament,  about  the  year  364  there  were  re- 
ceived at  the  Council  of  Laodicea  *  (which  was  after- 
wards approved  in  the  sixth  general  Council  f),  the  book 
of  Esther,  the  Epistle  of  S.  James,  the  Second  of  S. 
Peter,  the  Second  and  Third  of  S.  John,  that  of  S. 
Jude,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  fourteenth 
of  S.  Paul.  Then  some  time  afterwards  at  the  third 
Council  of  Carthage  J  (at  which  S.  Augustine  assisted, 
and  which  was  confirmed  in  the  sixth  general  Council 
in  Trullo),  besides  those  of  the  second  rank  just 
mentioned,  there  were  received  into  the  canon,  as  of 
full  authority,  Tobias,  Judith,  First  and  Second  Macha- 
bees.  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the  Apocalypse. 
But  of  all  those  of  the  second  rank,  the  book  of 
Judith  was  first  received  and  acknowledged  as  divine, 
in  the  first  General  Council  of  Nice,  as  S.  Jerome 
witnesses  in  his  preface  to  this  book.     Such  is  the 

*  Can.  Ix. 

t  i.e.  in  Canon  ii.  of  the  Council  in  Tridlo  (or  Quinisext),  which  is 
called  by  the  Greeks  the  sixth  General  Council,  as  being  a  continuation 
or  supplement  of  it.  Such  canons  of  this  Council  as  were  not  opposed 
to  previous  decrees  were  approved  by  Rome.  See  Hefele  Cone.  Bk.  xvii. 
The  Saint's  words  are  well  defended  by  Alibrandi  in  the  processus. 
Respons.  pp.  80,  81.     [Tr.] 

t  i.e.  in  Canon  xxxvi.  of  the  Council  of  Hippo,  approved  in  third 
Council  of  Carthage.     [Tr.] 

ART.  I.  cm.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  95 

way  in  which  the  two  ranks  were  brought  together 
into  one,  and  were  made  of  equal  authority  in  the 
Church  of  God,  but  progressively  and  with  succession, 
as  a  beautiful  morning  rising,  which  little  by  little 
lights  up  our  hemisphere. 

Thus  was  drawn  up  in  the  Council  of  Carthage, 
that  same  ancient  list  of  the  canonical  books  which 
has  ever  since  been  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and  which 
was  confirmed  in  the  sixth  general  Council,  at  the 
great  Council  of  Florence  160  years  ago  for  the  union 
of  the  Armenians  by  the  whole  Church  both  Greek 
and  Latin,  in  our  age  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  and 
which  was  followed  by  S.  Augustine."^  Before  the 
Council  of  Carthage  they  were  not  all  received  as 
canonical  by  any  decree  of  the  general  Church.  I 
had  almost  forgotten  to  say  that  you  must  not  there- 
fore make  a  difficulty  against  what  I  have  just  laid 
down  because  Baruch  is  not  quoted  by  name  in  the 
Council  of  Carthage.  For  since  Baruch  was  secretary 
of  Jeremias,  the  book  of  Baruch  was  reckoned  by  the 
ancients  as  an  accessory  or  appendix  of  Jeremias, 
being  comprised  under  this ;  as  that  excellent  theolo- 
gian Bellarmine  proves  in  his  Controversies.  But  it  is 
enough  for  me  to  have  said  thus  :  my  brief  outline 
is  not  obliged  to  dwell  on  every  particular.  In  n 
word,  all  these  books,  whether  of  first  or  second  rank, 
with  all  the  parts,  are  equally  certain,  sacred  and 

*  l)e  doc.  Chr.  ii.  8. 

96  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [paut  h. 



Such  are  the  sacred  and  canonical  books  which  the 
Church  has  unanimously  received  and  acknowledged 
during  twelve  hundred  years.  And  by  what  authority 
have  these  new  reformers  dared  to  wipe  out  at  one 
stroke  so  many  noble  parts  of  the  Bible  ?  They  have 
erased  a  part  of  Esther,  and  Baruch,  Tobias,  Judith, 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Machabees.  Who  has  told 
them  that  these  books  are  not  legitimate,  and  not  to 
be  received  ?  Why  do  they  thus  dismember  this 
sacred  body  of  the  Scriptures  ? 

Here  are  their  principal  reasons,  as  far  as  I  have 
been  able  to  gather  them  from  the  old  preface  to  the 
books  which  they  pretend  to  be  apocryphal,  printed 
at  Neufchastel,  in  the  translation  of  Peter  Piobert, 
otherwise  Olivetanus,  a  relation  and  friend  of  Calvin, 
and  again  from  the  newer  preface  placed  to  the  same 
books  by  the  professors  and  pretended  pastors  of  the 
Church  of  Geneva,  1588. 

(i.)  They  are  not  found  either  in  Hebrew  or 
Chaldaic,  in  which  languages  they  (except  perhaps  the 
Book  of  Wisdom)  were  originally  written :  therefore  it 
would  be  very  difficult  to  restore  them.  (2.)  They  are 
not  received  as  legitimate  by  the  Jews.  (3.)  Nor  by 
the  whole  Church.  (4).  S.  Jerome  says  that  they  are 
not  considered  proper  for  corroborating  the  authority 
of  Ecclesiastical  doctrines.     (5.)  Canon  Law  condemns 

ART.  I.  0.  IV.  J  The  Rule  of  Faith.  97 

them ;  (6.)  as  does  also  the  Gloss,  which  says  they 
are  read,  but  not  generally,  as  if  to  say  that  they  are 
not  approved  generally  everywhere.  (7.)  They  have 
been  corrupted  and  falsij&ed,  as  Eusebius  says ;  *  (8.) 
notably  the  Machabees,  (9.)  and  particularly  the  Second 
of  Machabees,  which  S.  Jerome  says  he  did  not  find 
in  Hebrew.  Such  are  the  reasons  of  Olivetanus.  ( i  o.) 
"  There  are  in  them  many  false  things,"  says  the  new 
preface.  Let  us  now  see  what  these  fine  researches 
are  worth. 

(i.)  And  as  to  the  first, — are  you  unwilling  to  re- 
ceive these  books  because  they  are  not  in  Hebrew  or 
Chaldaic  ?  Eeceive  Tobias  then,  for  S.  Jerome  attests 
that  he  translates  it  from  Chaldaic  into  Latin,  in  the 
Epistle  which  you  yourselves  quote,t  which  makes  me 
think  you  are  hardly  in  good  faith.  And  why  not 
Judith,  which  was  also  written  in  Chaldaic,  as  the 
same  S.  Jerome  says  in  the  prologue  ?  And  if  S. 
Jerome  says  he  was  not  able  to  find  the  second  of 
Machabees  in  the  Hebrew, — what  has  that  to  do  with 
the  first  ?  This  then  receive  as  it  deserves ;  we  will 
treat  of  the  second  afterwards.  I  say  the  same  to  you 
about  Ecclesiasticus,  which  S.  Jerome  had  and  found 
in  Hebrew,  as  he  says  in  his  preface  on  the  books  of 
Solomon.  Since,  then,  you  reject  these  books  written 
in  Hebrew  or  Chaldaic  equally  with  the  others  which 
are  not  written  in  one  of  those  languages,  you  will 
have  to  find  another  pretext  than  that  which  you 
have  alleged  for  striking  out  these  books  from  the 
canon.  When  you  say  that  you  reject  them  because 
they  are  not  written  in  Hebrew  or  Chaldaic,  this  is 
not  your  real  reason ;  for  you  would  not  reject  on  this 

*  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  22.  t  E]^.  ad  Chrom.  et  Heliod. 

HI.  G 

98  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  il 

ground  Tobias,  Judith,  the  first  of  Machabees,  Ecclesi- 
asticus,  which  are  written  either  in  Hebrew  or  Chaldaic. 
But  let  us  now  speak  in  defence  of  the  other  books, 
which  are  written  in  a  language  other  than  that  which 
you  would  have.  Where  do  you  find  that  the  rule 
for  rightly  receiving  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  that  they 
should  be  written  in  these  languages  rather  than  in 
Greek  or  Latin  ?  You  say  that  nothing  must  be 
received  in  matter  of  religion  but  what  is  written ; 
and  you  bring  forward  in  your  grand  preface  the  say- 
ing of  jurisconsults :  "  We  blush  to  speak  without  a 
law."  Do  you  not  consider  that  the  controversy 
about  the  validity  or  invalidity  of  the  Scriptures  is 
one  of  the  most  important  in  the  sphere  of  religion  ? 
Well  then,  either  remain  confounded,  or  else  produce 
the  Holy  Scripture  for  the  negative  which  you  main- 
tain. The  Holy  Spirit  certainly  declares  himself  as 
well  in  Greek  as  in  Chaldaic.  There  would  be,  you 
say,  great  difi&culty  in  restoring  them,  since  we  do  not 
possess  them  in  their  original  language,  and  it  is  this 
which  troubles  you.  But,  for  God's  sake,  tell  me  who 
told  you  that  they  were  lost,  corrupted  or  altered,  so 
as  to  need  restoration  ?  You  take  for  granted,  perhaps, 
that  those  who  have  translated  them  from  the  originals 
have  translated  badly,  and  you  would  have  the  original 
to  compare  them  and  judge  them.  Make  your  mean- 
ing clear  then,  and  say  that  they  are  therefore  apocry- 
phal because  you  cannot  yourselves  be  the  translators 
of  them  from  the  original,  and  cannot  trust  the  judg- 
ment of  the  translator.  So  there  is  to  be  nothing 
certain  except  what  you  have  had  the  control  of. 
Show  me  this  rule  of  certitude  in  the  Scripture. 
Further,  are  you  fully  assured    that  you  have  the 

ART.  I.  0.  IV.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  99 

Hebrew  texts  of  the  books  of  the  first  rank,  as  pure 
and  exact  as  they  were  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles 
and  of  the  Seventy  ?  Beware  of  errors.  You  certainly 
do  not  always  follow  them,  and  you  could  not,  with 
good  conscience.  Show  me  this  again  in  the  Holy 
Scripture.  Here,  therefore,  is  your  first  reason  most 
wanting  in  reason. 

(2.)  As  to  your  saying  that  these  books  which  you 
call  apocryphal  are  not  received  by  the  Jews,  you  say 
nothing  new  or  important.  S.  Augustine  loudly  ex- 
claims :  *  "It  is  the  Catholic  Church  which  holds  the 
Books  of  Machabees  as  canonical,  not  the  Jews." 
Thank  God,  we  are  not  Jews,  we  are  Catholics.  Show 
me  from  Scripture  that  the  Christian  Church  has  not 
as  much  power  to  give  authority  to  the  sacred  books 
as  the  Mosaic  may  have  had.  There  is  not  in  this 
either  Scripture  or  reason  to  show  for  it. 

(3.)  Yes,  but  the  whole  of  the  Church  itself  does 
not  receive  them,  you  say.  Of  what  Church  are  you 
speaking  ?  Unquestionably  the  Catholic,  which  is  the 
true  Church,  receives  them,  as  S.  Augustine  has  just 
now  borne  witness  to  you,  and  he  repeats  it,  citing 
the  Council  of  Carthage.t  The  Council  in  Trullo  the 
6th  General,  that  of  Florence,  and  a  hundred  ancient 
authors  are  [witnesses]  thereto.  I  name  S.  Jerome, 
who  witnesses  for  the  book  of  Judith  that  it  was  re- 
ceived in  the  first  Council  [of  Mce].  Perhaps  you 
would  say  that  of  old  time  some  Catholics  doubted  of 
their  authority.  This  is  clear  from  the  division  which 
I  have  made  above.     But  does  their  doubt  then  make 

*  De  civ.  Dei.  xviii.  36. 

t  The  necessary  references  and  explanations  are  given  in  notes  to 
preceding  chapter.     [Tr.] 

loo  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

it  impossible  for  their  successors  to  come  to  a  con- 
clusion ?  Are  we  to  say  that  if  one  cannot  decide  at 
the  very  first  glance  one  must  always  remain  wavering, 
uncertain,  and  irresolute  ?  Was  there  not  for  some 
time  an  uncertainty  about  the  Apocalypse  and  Esther? 
You  would  not  dare  to  deny  it:  my  witnesses  for 
Esther  are  too  sound, — S.  Athanasius  *  and  S.  Gregory 
Nazianzen :  t  for  the  Apocalypse,  the  Council  of 
Laodicea  : — and  yet  you  receive  them.  Either  receive 
them  all,  since  they  are  in  equal  position,  or  receive 
none,  on  the  same  ground.  But  in  God's  name  what 
humour  takes  you  that  you  here  bring  forward  the 
Church,  whose  authority  you  hold  to  be  a  hundred 
times  more  uncertain  than  these  books  themselves, 
and  which  you  say  to  have  been  erring,  inconstant, — 
yea  apocryphal,  if  apocryphal  means  hidden  ?  You 
only  prize  it  to  despise  it,  and  to  make  it  appear  in- 
constant, now  recognising,  now  rejecting  these  books. 
But  there  is  a  great  difference  between  doubting 
whether  a  thing  is  to  be  accepted  and  rejecting  it. 
Doubt  does  not  hinder  a  subsequent  resolution,  indeed 
it  is  its  preliminary  stage.  To  reject  presupposes  a 
decision.  Inconstancy  does  not  consist  in  changing  a 
doubt  into  resolution,  but  in  changing  from  resolution 
to  doubt.  It  is  not  instability  to  become  settled  after 
wavering,  but  to  waver  after  being  settled.  The 
Church  then,  having  for  a  time  left  these  books  in 
doubt,  at  length  has  received  them  with  authentic 
decision,  and  you  wish  that  from  this  resolution  she 
should  return  into  doubt.  It  belongs  to  heresy  and 
not  to  the  Church  thus  to  advance  from  bad  to  worse. 

But  of  this  elsewhere.  ^*:\n,^oT  j  .  ;- 

*  In  Synopsi.    ^f  '  V^  t  In  cariri.  <^  t^  sac. 


AET.  I.  0.  IV.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  loi 

(4.)  As  for  S.  Jerome  whom  you  allege,  this  is  not 
to  the  purpose,  since  in  his  time  the  Church  had  not 
yet  come  to  the  resolution  which  she  has  come  to 
since,  as  to  the  placing  of  these  books  on  the  canon, 
except  that  of  Judith. 

(5.)  And  the  canon  Sancta  Romana,  which  is  of 
Gelasius  I. — I  think  you  have  taken  it  by  guess,  for 
it  is  entirely  against  you ;  because,  while  censuring 
the  apocryphal  books,  it  does  not  name  one  of  those 
which  we  receive,  but  on  the  contrary  witnesses  that 
Tobias  and  the  Machabees  were  publicly  received  in 
the  Church. 

(6.)  And  the  poor  Gloss  does  not  deserve  to  be  thus 
glossed,  since  it  clearly  says  that  these  books  are  read, 
though  not  perhaps  generally.  This  "  perhaps " 
guards  it  from  stating  what  is  false,  and  you  have 
forgotten  it.  And  if  it  reckon  the  books  in  question  as 
apocryphal,  this  is  because  it  considered  that  apocry- 
phal meant  the  having  no  certain  author,  and  there- 
fore it  includes  as  apocryphal  the  Book  of  Judges : 
and  its  statements  are  not  so  authentic  that  they  must 
pass  as  decisive  judgment ;  after  all  it  is  but  a  Gloss. 

(7.)  And  these  falsifications  which  you  allege  are 
not  in  any  way  sufficient  to  abolish  the  authority  of 
these  books,  because  they  have  been  justified  and  have 
been  purified  from  all  corruption  before  the  Church 
received  them.  Truly,  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture have  been  corrupted  by  the  ancient  enemies  of 
the  Church,  but  by  the  providence  of  God  they  have 
remained  free  and  pure  in  the  Church's  hands,  as  a 
sacred  deposit ;  and  they  have  never  been  able  to  spoil 
so  many  copies  as  that  ,  there  should  not  remain 
enough  to  restore  the  others. 

I02  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

(8.)  But  you  would  have  the  Machabees,  at  any  rate, 
fall  from  our  hands,  when  you  say  that  they  have  been 
corrupted ;  but  since  you  only  advance  a  simple  asser- 
tion I  will  return  your  pass  by  a  simple  negation. 

(9.)  S.  Jerome,  you  say,  could  not  find  the  Second 
in  Hebrew ;  and  although  it  is  true  that  it  is  only  as 
it  were  a  letter  which  [those  of]  Israel  sent  to  their 
Jewish  brethren  who  were  then  out  of  Judea,  and 
although  it  is  written  in  the  best  known  and  most 
general  language  of  those  times,  does  it  thence  follow 
that  it  is  not  worthy  to  be  received  ?  The  Egyptians 
used  the  Greek  language  much  more  than  the  Hebrew, 
as  Ptolemy  clearly  showed  when  he  procured  the 
version  of  the  Seventy.  This  is  why  this  second  book 
of  Machabees,  which  was  like  an  epistle  or  commen- 
tary sent  for  the  consolation  of  the  Jews  who  were  in 
Egypt,  was  written  in  Greek  rather  than  in  Hebrew. 

( I  o.)  It  remams  for  the  new  preachers  to  point  out 
those  falsehoods  of  which  they  accuse  these  books; 
which  they  will  in  truth  never  do.  But  I  see  them 
coming,  bringing  forward  the  intercession  of  Saints, 
prayer  for  the  dead,  free-will,  the  honouring  of  relics, 
and  similar  points,  which  are  expressly  confirmed  in 
the  Books  of  Machabees,  in  Ecclesiasticus,  and  in 
other  books  which  they  pretend  to  be  apocryphal. 
For  God's  sake  take  care  that  your  judgment  does  not 
deceive  you.  Why,  I  pray  you,  do  you  call  false,  things 
which  the  whole  of  antiquity  has  held  as  articles  of 
faith  ?  Why  do  you  not  rather  censure  your  fancies 
which  will  not  embrace  the  doctrine  of  these  books, 
than  censure  these  books  which  have  been  received 
for  so  long  a  time  because  they  do  not  jump  with 
your  humour  ?     Because  you  will  not  believe   what 

ART.  I.  0.  v.]  The  Rtiie  of  Fait k.  103 

the  books  teach,  you  condemn  it; — why  do  you  not 
rather  condemn  your  presumption  which  is  incredulous 
to  their  teaching  ? 

Here  now,  I  think,  are  all  your  reasons  scattered  to 
the  winds,  and  you  can  bring  no  more.  But  we  may 
well  say :  if  it  be  thus  lawful  indifferently  to  reject 
or  make  doubtful  the  authority  of  those  Scriptures, 
about  which  there  was  formerly  a  doubt,  though  the 
Church  has  now  decided,  it  will  be  necessary  to  reject 
or  to  doubt  of  a  great  part  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testament.  It  is  then  no  little  gain  to  the  enemy  of 
Christianity,  to  have  at  one  stroke  scratched  out  of 
the  Holy  Scripture  so  many  noble  parts.  Let  us 



The  crafty  merchant  keeps  out  the  worst  articles  of 
his  stock  to  offer  first  to  buyers,  to  try  if  he  can  get 
rid  of  them  and  sell  them  to  some  simpleton.  The 
reasons  which  these  reformers  have  advanced  in  the 
preceding  chapter  are  but  tricks,  as  we  have  seen, 
which  are  used  only  as  it  were  for  amusement,  to  try 
whether  some  simple  and  weak  brain  will  be  content 
with  them ;  and,  in  reality,  when  one  comes  to  the 
grapple,  they  confess   that  not  the   authority  of  the 

104  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  n. 

Church,  nor  of  S.  Jerome,  nor  of  the  Gloss,  nor  of  the 
Hebrew,  is  cause  sufficient  to  receive  or  reject  any 
Scripture.  The  following  is  their  protestation  of  faith 
presented  to  the  King  of  France  by  the  French  pre- 
tended reformers.  After  having  placed  on  the  list,  in 
the  third  article,  the  books  they  are  willing  to  receive, 
they  write  thus  in  the  fourth  article :  "  We  know 
these  books  to  be  canonical  and  a  most  safe  rule  of 
our  faith,  not  so  much  by  the  common  accord  and  con- 
sent of  the  Church,  as  by  the  testimony  and  interior 
persuasion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  gives  us  to  dis- 
cern them  from  the  other  ecclesiastical  books."  Quit- 
ting then  the  field  of  the  reasons  preceding,  and 
making  for  cover,  they  throw  themselves  into  the 
interior,  secret,  and  invisible  persuasion  which  they 
consider  to  be  produced  in  them  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Now  in  truth  it  is  judicious  in  them  not  to  choose 
to  rely  in  this  point  on  the  conmon  accord  and  consent 
of  the  Church ;  for  this  common  accord  has  placed  on 
the  canon  Ecclesiasticus  and  the  Machabees,  as  much  as 
and  as  early  as  the  Apocalypse,  and  yet  they  choose  to 
receive  this  and  to  reject  those.  Judith,  made  authori- 
tative by  the  grand  and  irreproachable  Council  of 
Nice,  is  blotted  out  by  these  reformers.  They  have 
reason  then  to  confess  that  in  the  reception  of  canon- 
ical books,  they  do  not  accept  the  accord  and  consent 
of  the  Church,  which  was  never  greater  or  more  solemn 
than  in  that  first  Council. 

But  for  God's  sake  notice  the  trick.  "  We  know," 
say  they,  "  these  books  to  be  canonical,  not  so  much  by 
the  common  consent  and  accord  of  the  Church."  To 
hear  them  speak,  would  you  not  say  that  at  least  to 
some   extent   they  let  themselves  be  guided  by   the 

ART.  I.  b.  v.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  105 

Church  ?  Their  speech  is  not  sincere :  it  seems  as  if 
they  did  not  altogether  refuse  credit  to  the  common 
accord  of  Christians,  but  only  did  not  receive  it  as  on 
the  same  level  with  their  interior  persuasion: — in 
reality,  however,  they  hold  it  in  no  account  at  all : 
they  are  thus  cautious  in  their  language  in  order  not  to 
appear  altogether  arrogant  and  unreasonable.  For,  I 
ask  you,  if  they  deferred  as  little  as  you  please  to 
ecclesiastical  authority,  why  would  they  receive  the 
Apocalypse  rather  than  Judith  or  the  Machabees  ?  S. 
Augustine  and  S.  Jerome  are  faithful  witnesses  to  us 
that  these  have  been  unanimously  received  by  the 
whole  Catholic  Church ;  and  the  Councils  of  Carthage, 
in  Trullo,  Florence,  assure  us  thereof.  Why  then  do 
they  say  that  they  do  receive  these  sacred  books  not 
so  much  by  the  common  accord  of  the  Church  as  by 
interior  persuasion,  since  the  common  accord  of  the 
Church  has  neither  value  nor  place  in  the  matter  ? 
It  is  their  custom  when  they  would  bring  forward 
some  strange  opinion  not  to  speak  clearly  and  frankly, 
in  order  to  give  the  reader  a  better  impression. 

And  now  let  us  look  at  the  rule  they  have  for 
distinguishing  the  canonical  books  from  the  other 
Ecclesiastical  ones.  "  The  testimony,"  they  say,  "  and 
interior  persuasion  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Good  heavens  ! 
what  obscurity,  what  dense  fog,  what  shades  of  night ! 
Are  we  not  now  fully  enlightened  in  so  important 
and  grave  a  difference !  The  question  is  how  one 
can  tell  these  canonical  books ;  we  wish  to  have  some 
rule  to  distinguish  them ; — and  they  offer  us  some- 
thing that  passes  in  the  interior  of  the  soul,  which 
no  one  sees,  nobody  knows  save  the  soul  itself  and  its 
Creator ! 

io6  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  n. 

(i.)  Show  me  clearly  that  when  you  tell  me  that 
such  and  such  an  inspiration  exists  in  your  conscience, 
you  are  not  telling  a  lie.  You  say  that  you  feel  this 
persuasion  witliin  you.  But  why  am  I  bound  to 
believe  you  ?  Is  your  word  so  powerful  that  I  am 
forced  under  its  authority  to  believe  that  you  think 
and  feel  what  you  say.  I  am  willing  to  hold  you  as 
good  people  enough,  but  when  there  is  question  of 
the  foundations  of  my  faith,  as  of  receiving  or  rejecting 
the  Ecclesiastical  Scriptures,  I  find  neither  your  ideas 
nor  your  words  steady  enough  to  serve  me  as  a  base. 

(2.)  Show  me  clearly  that  these  inspirations  and 
persuasions  that  you  pretend  to  have  are  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Who  knows  not  that  the  spirit  of  darkness 
very  often  appears  in  clothing  of  light  ? 

(3.)  Does  this  spirit  grant  his  persuasions  indiffer- 
ently to  every  one,  or  only  to  some  particular  persons  ? 
If  to  every  one,  how  does  it  happen  that  so  many 
millions  of  Catholics  have  never  perceived  them,  nor 
so  many  women,  working-people,  and  otliers  among 
yourselves  ?  If  it  is  to  some  in  particular,  show 
them  me,  I  beg  you, — and  why  to  these  rather  than 
to  others  ?  What  mark  will  you  give  me  to  know  them 
and  to  pick  them  out  from  the  crowd  of  the  rest  of 
men  ?  Must  I  believe  in  the  first  who  shall  say : 
here  you  are  ?  This  would  be  to  put  ourselves  too 
much  at  a  venture  and  at  the  mercy  of  deceivers. 
Show  me  then  some  infallible  rule  to  recognise  these 
inspired  ones,  these  persuaded  ones,  or  else  permit  me 
to  credit  none  of  them. 

(4.)  But,  in  conscience,  do  you  think  that  the  interior 
persuasion  is  a  sufficient  means  to  distinguish  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  and  put  the  nations  out  of  doubt  ? 

ART.  I.e.  v.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  107 

How  comes  it  then  that  Luther  throws  off  the  Epistle 
of  S.  James,  which  Calvin  receives  ?  Try  to  harmonise, 
I  pray  you,  this  spirit  and  his  persuasions,  who  per- 
suades the  one  to  reject  what  he  persuades  the  other 
to  receive.  You  will  say,  perhaps,  that  Luther  is 
mistaken.  He  will  say  as  much  of  you.  Which  is 
to  be  believed  ?  Luther  ridicules  Ecclesiastes,  he 
considers  Job  a  fable.  Will  you  oppose  him  your 
persuasion  ?  he  will  oppose  you  his.  So  this  spirit, 
divided  against  himself,  will  leave  you  no  other  con- 
clusion except  to  grow  thoroughly  obstinate,  each  in 
his  own  opinion. 

(5.)  Then  what  reason  is  there  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
should  give  inspirations  as  to  what  every  one  must 
believe  to  nobodies,  to  Luther,  to  Calvin, — they  having 
abandoned  without  any  such  inspiration  the  Councils 
and  the  entire  Church.  We  do  not  deny,  to  speak 
clearly,  but  that  the  knowledge  of  the  true  sacred 
books  is  a  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  we  say  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  gives  it  to  private  individuals  through 
the  medium  of  the  Church.  Indeed  if  God  had  a 
thousand  times  revealed  a  thing  to  a  private  person  we 
should  not  be  obliged  to  believe  it  unless  he  stamped 
it  so  clearly  that  we  could  no  longer  call  its  validity 
in  question.  But  we  see  nothing  of  this  among  your 
reformers.  In  a  word,  it  is  to  the  Church  General 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  immediately  addresses  his  in- 
spirations and  persuasions,  then,  by  the  preaching  of 
the  Church,  he  communicates  them  to  private  persons. 
It  is  the  Spouse  in  whom  the  milk  is  produced,  then 
the  children  suck  it  from  her  breasts.  But  you 
would  have  it,  on  the  contrary,  that  God  inspires 
private  persons,  and  by  these  means  the  Church,  that  the 

io8  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  il 

children  receive  the  milk  and  the  mother  is  nourished 
at  their  breasts  ; — an  absurdity. 

Now  if  the  Scripture  is  not  violated  and  its  majesty 
offended  by  the  setting  up  of  these  interior  and 
private  inspirations,  it  never  was  nor  will  be  violated. 
For  by  this  means  the  door  is  open  to  every  one  to 
receive  or  reject  of  the  Scriptures  what  shall  seem 
good  to  him.  Why  shall  one  allow  Calvin  to  cut  off 
Wisdom  or  the  Machabees,  and  not  Luther  to  remove 
the  Epistle  of  S.  James  or  the  Apocalypse,  or  Castalio 
the  Canticle  of  Canticles,  or  the  Anabaptists  the 
Gospel  of  S.  Mark,  or  another  person  Genesis  and 
Exodus  ?  If  all  protest  that  they  have  interior  revela- 
tion why  shall  we  believe  one  rather  than  another,  so 
that  this  rule  supposed  to  be  sacred  on  account  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  will  be  violated  by  the  audacity  of  every 

Eecognise,  I  pray  you,  the  stratagem.  They  have 
taken  away  all  authority  from  Tradition,  the  Church, 
the  Councils, — what  more  remains  ?  The  Scripture. 
The  enemy  is  crafty :  if  he  would  take  all  away  at 
one  stroke  he  would  cause  alarm.  He  starts  a  certain 
and  infallible  method  of  getting  rid  of  it  bit  by  bit, 
and  very  gradually:  that  is,  this  idea  of  interior  in- 
spiration, by  which  everybody  can  receive  or  reject 
what  seems  good  to  him.  And  in  fact  consider  a  little 
how  the  process  works  itself  out.  Calvin  removes  and 
erases  from  the  canon  Baruch,  Tobias,  Judith,  Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus,  Machabees ;  Luther  takes  away  the 
Epistle  of  S.  James,  of  S.  Jude,  the  Second  of  S.  Peter, 
the  Second  and  Third  of  S.  John,  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews ;  he  ridicules  Ecclesiastes,  and  holds  Job  a 
fable.     In  Daniel,   Calvin  has  erased  the  Canticle  of 

ART.  I.  c.  v.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  109 

the  Three  Children,  the  history  of  Susanna  and  that 
of  the  dragon  of  Bel ;  also  a  great  part  of  Esther.  In 
Exodus,  at  Geneva  and  elsewhere  among  these  refor- 
mers, they  have  cut  out  the  twenty-second  verse  of  the 
second  chapter,  which  is  of  such  weight  that  neither 
the  Seventy  nor  the  other  translators  would  ever  have 
written  it  if  it  had  not  been  in  the  original.  Beza 
casts  a  doubt  over  the  history  of  the  adulteress  in  the 
Gospel  of  S.  John  (S.  Augustine  warns  us  that  already 
the  enemies  of  Christianity  had  erased  it  from  their 
books ;  but  not  from  all,  as  S.  Jerome  says).  In  the 
mysterious  words  of  the  Eucharist,  do  they  not  try  to 
overthrow  the  authority  of  those  words :  Which  shall 
he  shed  for  you,  because  the  Greek  text  *  clearly  shows 
that  what  was  in  the  chalice  was  not  wine,  but  the 
blood  of  Our  Saviour?  As  if  one  were  to  say  in 
French :  Ceci  est  la  coupe  du  nouveau  Testament  en 
mon  sangy  laquelle  sera  respandiie  pour  vous.  For  in 
this  way  of  speaking  that  which  is  in  the  cup  must 
be  the  true  blood,  not  the  wine  ;  since  the  wine  has 
not  been  shed  for  us  but  the  blood,  and  the  cup  can- 
not be  poured  out  except  by  reason  of  what  it  con- 
tains. What  is  the  knife  with  which  one  has  made 
so  many  amputations  ?  This  tenet  of  private  inspira- 
tion. What  is  it  that  makes  you  reformers  so  bold 
to  cut  away  one  this  piece,  another  that,  and  the  other 
something  else  ?  The  pretext  of  these  interior  persua- 
sions of  the  Spirit,  which  makes  them  supreme  each 

*  Not  Tip  in  the  Dative,  agreeing  with  at/naTL,  but  to  in  the  Nomi- 
native, agi'eeing  with  irorrfpiov.  The  Saint  represents  this  in  French 
by  the  change  of  gender.  It  is  not  clearly  expressed  in  the  Latin,  and 
our  English  translation  would  seem  to  favour  the  wrong  meaning, 
Shall  he  poured  out  is  more  correct,  but  still  ambiguous.     [Tr.] 

no  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  ii. 

in  his  own  idea,  in  judging  as  to  the  validity  or  in- 
validity of  the  Scriptures.  On  the  contrary,  gentlemen, 
S.  Augustine  protests  :  *  "  For  my  part,  I  would  not 
believe  the  Gospel  unless  the  authority  of  the  Catholic 
Church  moved  me  thereto."  And  elsewhere  :  t  "  We 
receive  the  New  and  the  Old  Testament  in  that 
number  of  books  which  the  authority  of  the  Catholic 
Church  determines."  The  Holy  Spirit  can  give  his 
inspirations  as  he  likes,  but  as  to  the  establishment  of 
the  public  and  general  belief  of  the  faithful,  he  only 
directs  us  to  the  Church.  It  is  hers  to  propose  which 
are  the  true  Scriptures  and  which  are  not. 



But  here  is  the  difficulty.  If  these  books  were  not 
from  the  beginning  of  undoubted  authority  in  the 
Church,  who  can  give  them  this  authority  ?  In  truth 
the  Church  cannot  give  truth  or  certitude  to  the 
Scripture,  or  make  a  book  canonical  if  it  were  not  so, 
but  the  Church  can  make  a  book  known  as  canonical, 
and  make  us  certain  of  its  certitude,  and  is  fully  able 
to  declare  that  a  book  is  canonical  which  is  not  held 
as  such  by  every  one,  and  •  thus  to  give  it  credit  in 
Christendom  ;  not  changing  the  substance  of  the  book 
which  of  itself  was  canonical,  but  changing  the  per- 
suasion of  Christians,  making  it  quite  assured  where 
previously  it  had  not  been  so. 

*  Contra  Ep,  Fund.  v.  +  Serm.  de  Temp.  cxcL 

ART.  I.  c.  VI.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  1 1 1 

But  how  can  the  Church  herself  define  that  a  book 
is  canonical  ? — for  she  is  no  longer  guided  by  new 
revelations  but  by  the  old  Apostolic  ones,  of  which 
she  has  infallibility  of  interpretation.  And  if  the 
Ancients  have  not  had  the  revelation  of  the  authority 
of  a  book,  how  then  can  she  know  it  ?  She  considers 
the  testimony  of  antiquity,  the  conformity  which  this 
book  has  with  the  others  which  are  received,  and  the 
general  relish  which  the  Christian  people  find  in  it. 
For  as  we  can  know  what  is  a  proper  and  wholesome 
food  for  animals  when  we  see  them  fond  of  it  and 
feed  on  it  with  advantage,  so,  when  the  Church  sees 
that  the  Christian  people  heartily  relishes  a  book  as 
canonical  and  gains  good  from  it,  she  may  know  that 
it  is  a  fit  and  wholesome  meat  for  Christian  souls ; 
and  as  when  we  would  know  whether  one  wine  is  of 
the  same  vintage  as  another  we  compare  them,  observ- 
ing whether  the  colour,  the  smell  and  the  taste  are 
alike  in  the  two,  so  when  the  Church  has  properly 
decided  that  a  book  has  a  taste,  colour  and  smell — 
holiness  of  style,  doctrine  and  mysteries — like  to  the 
other  canonical  books,  and  besides  has  the  testimony 
of  many  good  and  irreproachable  witnesses  of  antiquity, 
she  can  declare  the  book  to  be  true  brother  of  the 
other  canonical  ones.  And  we  must  not  doubt  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  assists  the  Church  in  this  judgment : 
for  your  ministers  themselves  confess  that  God  has 
given  the  Holy  Scripturesi  into  her  charge,  and  say 
that  it  is  on  this  account  S.  Paul  calls  her  the  pillar 
and  ground  of  the  truth*  And  how  would  she  guard 
them  if  she  could  not  know  and  separate  them  from 
the  mixture  of  other  books  ?      And  how  important  is 

*  I  Tim.  iii.  15. 

112  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

it  for  the  Church  that  she  should  be  able  to  know 
in  proper  time  and  season  which  Scripture  is  holy 
and  which  not :  for  if  she  received  such  and  such 
Scripture  as  holy  and  it  was  not,  she  would  lead  us 
into  superstition ;  and  if  she  refused  the  honour  and 
belief  which  befit  God's  Word  to  a  holy  Scripture, 
it  would  be  an  impiety.  If  ever  then  Our  Lord 
defends  his  Church  against  the  gates  of  hell,  if  ever 
the  Holy  Spirit  assisted  her  so  closely  that  she  could 
say :  It  tiath  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Spirit  and  to  us,'* 
— we  must  firmly  believe  that  he  inspires  her  on 
occasions  of  such  great  consequences  as  these ;  for  it 
would  indeed  be  to  abandon  her  at  her  need  if  he  left 
her  at  this  juncture,  on  which  depends  not  only  an 
article  or  two  of  our  faith,  but  the  substance  of  our 
religion.  When,  therefore,  the  Church  has  declared 
that  a  book  is  canonical,  we  must  never  doubt  but 
that  it  is  so.  We  [are]  here  in  the  same  position. 
For  Calvin  and  the  very  bibles  of  Geneva,  and  the 
Lutherans,  receive  several  books  as  holy,  sacred,  and 
canonical  which  have  not  been  acknowledged  by  all 
the  Ancients  as  such,  and  about  which  there  has  been  a 
doubt.  If  there  has  been  a  doubt  formerly,  what 
reason  can  they  have  to  make  them  assured  and 
certain  nowadays,  except  that  which  S.  Augustine  had 
[as  we  said  above] :  "  I  would  not  believe  the  Gospel 
unless  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church  moved 
me  ;  "  and  "  We  receive  the  New  and  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  that  number  of  books  which  the  authority 
of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  determines."  Truly 
we  should  be  very  ill  assured  if  we  were  to  rest 
our   faith  on  these  particular  interior  inspirations,  of 

*  Acts  XV.  28. 

ART.  I.  0.  VI.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  1 1 3 

which  we  only  know  that  they  exist  or  ever  did  exist, 
by  the  testimony  of  some  private  persons.  And 
granted  that  they  are  or  have  been,  we  do  not  know 
whether  they  are  from  the  false  or  of  the  true  spirit ; 
and  supposing  they  are  of  the  true  spirit,  we  do  not 
know  whether  they  who  relate  them,  relate  them  faith- 
fully or  not,  since  they  have  no  mark  of  infallibility 
whatever.  We  should  deserve  to  be  wrecked  if  we 
were  to  cast  ourselves  out  of  the  ship  of  the  public 
judgment  of  the  Church,  to  sail  in  the  miserable  skiff 
of  these  new  discordant  private  inspirations.  Our 
faith  would  not  be  Catholic,  but  private. 

But  before  I  quit  this  subject,  I  pray  you,  reformers, 
tell  me  whence  you  have  taken  the  canon  of  the 
Scriptures  which  you  follow  ?  You  have  not  taken  it 
from  the  Jews,  for  the  books  of  the  Gospels  would 
not  be  there ;  nor  from  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  for 
the  Apocalypse  would  not  be  in  it ;  nor  from  the 
Councils  of  Carthage  or  of  Florence,  for  Ecclesiasticus 
and  the  Machabees  would  be  there.  Whence,  then, 
have  you  taken  it  ?  In  good  sooth,  like  canon  was 
never  spoken  of  before  your  time.  The  Church  never 
saw  canon  of  the  Scriptures  in  which  there  was  not 
either  more  or  less  than  in  yours.  What  likelihood 
is  there  that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  hidden  himself  from 
all  antiquity,  and  that  after  1500  years  he  has  disclosed 
to  certain  private  persons  the  list  of  the  true  Scrip- 
tures ?  For  our  part  we  follow  exactly  the  list  of  the 
Council  of  Laodicea,  with  the  addition  made  at  the 
Councils  of  Carthage  and  Florence.  Never  will  a  man 
of  judgment  leave  these  Councils  to  follow  the 
persuasions  of  private  individuals.  Here,  then,  is  the 
fountain  and  source  of  all  the  violations  which  have 
m.  H 

1 14  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  il 

been  made  of  this  holy  rule ;  namely,  when  people 
have  taken  up  the  fancy  of  not  receiving  it  save  by 
the  measure  and  rule  of  the  inspirations  which  each 
one  believes  and  thinks  he  feels. 



Now,  how  can  an  honest  soul  refrain  from  "ivinof  the 
rein  to  the  ardour  of  a  holy  zeal,  and  from  entering 
into  a  Christian  anger,  without  sin,  considering  with 
what  presumption  those  who  do  nothing  but  cry, 
Scripture,  Scripture,  have  despised,  degraded,  and  pro- 
faned this  divine  Testament  of  the  eternal  Father,  as 
they  have  falsified  this  sacred  contract  of  so  glorious 
an  alliance !  0  ministers  of  Calvinism,  how  do  you 
dare  to  cut  away  so  many  noble  parts  of  the  sacred 
body  of  the  Bibles  ?  You  take  away  Baruch,  Tobias, 
Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  the  Machabees : — why 
do  you  thus  dismember  the  Holy  Scripture  ?  Who 
has  told  you  that  they  are  not  sacred  ?  There  was 
some  doubt  about  them  in  the  ancient  Church ;  but 
was  there  not  doubt  in  the  ancient  Church  about 
Esther,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  those  of  S.  James 
and  S.  Jude,  the  Second  of  S.  Peter,  the  two  last  of 

*  Passages  in  this  chapter  coincide  with  passages  in  the  chapters 
immediately  preceding  and  following,  but  we  have  thought  it  better, 
for  reasons  explained  in  the  Preface,  to  print  it  as  it  stands.  It  seems 
to  be  a  fragment  of  a  more  extended  treatment  of  this  part.     [Tr,] 

AKT.  L  c.  vii]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  1 1 5 

S.  John,  and  especially  of  the  Apocalypse  ?  Why  do 
you  not  also  erase  these  as  you  have  done  those  ? 
Acknowledge  honestly  that  what  you  have  done  in 
this  has  only  been  in  order  to  contradict  the  Church. 
You  were  angry  at  seeing  in  the  Machabees  the  inter- 
cession of  Saints  and  prayers  for  the  departed :  Eccle- 
siasticus  stung  you  in  that  it  bore  witness  to  free-will 
and  the  honour  of  relics.  Eather  than  do  violence  to 
your  notions,  adjusting  them  to  the  Scriptures,  you 
have  violated  the  Scriptures  to  accommodate  them 
to  your  notions :  you  have  cut  off  the  holy  Word  to 
avoid  cutting  off  your  fancies :  how  will  you  ever 
cleanse  yourselves  from  this  sacrilege  ?  Have  you 
degraded  the  Machabees,  Ecclesiasticus,  Tobias,  and 
the  rest,  because  some  of  the  Ancients  have  doubted 
of  their  authority?  Why  then  do  you  receive  the 
other  books,  about  which  there  has  been  as  much 
doubt  as  about  these  ?  What  can  you  oppose  to  them 
except  that  their  doctrine  is  hard  for  you  to  accept  ? 
Open  your  heart  to  faith,  and  you  will  easily  receive 
that  which  your  unbelief  shuts  out  from  you.  Because 
you  do  not  will  to  believe  what  they  teach,  you  con- 
demn them :  rather  condemn  your  presumption,  and 
receive  the  Scripture.  I  would  chiefly  lay  stress  on 
the  authority  of  those  books  which  exercise  you  the 
most.  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Strom,  vii.  16,  &c.), 
Cyprian  {Ep.  Ixv.),  Ambrose  {de  fide  iv.),  Augustine 
{Ep.  ad  Or  OS.  contra  Prise),  and  the  rest  of  the 
Fathers  consider  Ecclesiasticus  canonical.  S.  Cyprian 
(Serm.  de  op  et  Eleem.),  S.  Ambrose  {lib.  de  Tobid,  i.), 
S.  Basil  {de  avar.),  honour  Tobias  as  Holy  Scripture. 
S.  Cyprian  again  {de  exhort,  mar.),  S.  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen  {orat.  de  Mach.),  S.  Ambrose  (de  Jacob  et  vit  beat. 

1 1 6  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h, 

X.  xi.),  believed  the  same  of  the  Machabees.  S.  Augus- 
tine protests  that :  "  it  is  the  Catholic  Church  which 
holds  the  Books  of  Machabees  as  canonical,  not  the 
Jews."  What  will  you  say  to  this  ? — that  the  Jews 
had  them  not  in  their  catalogues  ?  S.  Augustine 
acknowledges  it ;  but  are  you  Jews,  or  Christians  ? 
If  you  would  be  called  Christians,  be  satisfied  that 
the  Christian  Church  receives  them.  Is  the  light  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  extinguished  with  the  synagogue  ? 
Had  not  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles  as  much  power 
as  the  synagogue  ?  Although  the  Church  has  not 
taken  authority  for  her  books  from  the  mouth  of  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees,  will  it  not  suffice  that  she  has 
taken  it  from  the  testimony  of  the  Apostles  ?  Now 
we  must  not  think  that  the  ancient  Church  and  these 
most  ancient  doctors  would  have  had  the  boldness  to 
rank  these  books  as  canonical,  if  they  had  not  had 
some  direction  by  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles  and 
their  disciples  who  could  know  in  what  rank  the 
Master  himself  held  them : — unless,  to  excuse  our 
imaginations,  we  are  to  accuse  of  profanation,  and  of 
sacrilege,  such  holy  and  grave  doctors  as  these,  and 
the  whole  ancient  Church.  I  say  the  ancient  Church, 
because  the  Council  of  Carthage,  Gelasius  in  the 
decree  de  lihris  canonicis,  Innocent  I.  in  the  epistle  to 
Exuperius,  and  S.  Augustine,  lived  before  S.  Gregory, 
before  whose  time  Calvin  confesses  that  the  Church 
was  still  in  its  purity,  and  yet  these  bear  witness  that 
all  the  books  which  we  held  to  be  canonical  when 
Luther  appeared  were  already  so  in  their  time.  If 
you  would  destroy  the  credit  of  those  holy  books,  why 
did  you  not  destroy  that  of  the  Apocalypse,  about 
which  there  has  been  so  much  doubt,  and  that  of  the 

ART.  I.  0.  VII.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  1 1 7 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ?  But  I  return  to  you,  gentle- 
men of  Thonon,  who  have  hitherto  given  ear  to  such 
men ;  I  beseech  you,  let  us  say  in  conscience,  is  there 
any  likelihood  that  Calvin  knows  better  what  grounds 
they  had  who  anciently  doubted  of  these  books,  and 
what  grounds  they  who  doubted  not,  than  the  Bishops 
and  Councils  of  these  days  ?  And  still,  all  things 
well  considered,  antiquity  received  them ; — what  do  we 
allege  to  the  contrary  ?  Oh  !  if  it  were  lawful  for  men, 
in  order  to  raise  their  opinions  on  horseback,  to  use 
the  Scripture  as  stirrups,  to  lengthen  and  shorten 
them,  each  one  to  his  own  size,  where,  I  beg  you, 
should  we  be  ?  Do  you  not  perceive  the  stratagem  ? 
All  authority  is  taken  away  from  Tradition,  the  Church, 
the  Councils,  the  Pastors :  what  further  remains  ?  The 
Scripture.  The  enemy  is  crafty.  If  he  would  tear  it  all 
away  at  once  he  would  cause  an  alarm ;  he  takes  away 
a  great  part  of  it  in  the  very  beginning,  then  first  one 
piece,  then  the  other,  at  last  he  will  have  you  stripped 
entirely,  without  Scripture  and  without  Word  of  God. 
Calvin  takes  away  seven  books  of  the  Scripture :  * 
Baruch,  Tobias,  Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and 
the  Machabees ;  Luther  has  removed  the  Epistle  of  S. 
James,  that  of  S.  Jude,  the  2nd  of  S.  Peter,  the  2nd 
and  3rd  of  S.  John,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ;  he  ridi- 
cules Ecclesiastes,  he  holds  Job  as  a  fable.  Eeconcile, 
I  pray  you,  this  false  spirit,  who  takes  away  from 
Luther's  brain  what  he  puts  back  in  that  of  Calvin. 
Does  this  seem  to  you  a  trifling  discord  between  these 
two  evangelists  ?  You  will  say  you  do  not  hold 
Luther's  intelligence  in  great  account ;  his  party  think 
no  better  of  that  of  Calvin.     But  see  the  progress  of 

*  In  prologis  Bib.  et  horum  lib. 

1 1 8  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  n. 

your  fine  church,  how  she  ever  pushes  on  further. 
Calvin  had  removed  seven  books,  she  has  further 
thrown  out  the  8th,  that  of  Esther:*  in  Daniel  she 
cuts  off  the  canticle  of  the  Three  Children  (c.  iii.), 
the  history  of  Susanna  (c.  xiii.),  and  that  of  the  dragon 
slain  by  Daniel  (xiv).  In  the  Gospel  of  S.  John  is 
there  not  doubt  among  you  of  the  history  of  the 
woman  taken  in  adultery  ?  S.  Augustine  had  indeed 
said  formerly  that  the  enemies  of  the  faith  had  erased 
it  from  their  books,  but  not  from  all,  as  S.  Jerome 
says.  Do  they  not  wish  to  take  away  these  words  of 
S.  Luke  (xxii.  20),  which  shall  he  shed  for  you,  because 
the  Greek  text  {to  virep  vjucop  eK-^Qjvoixevov)  clearly 
shows  that  what  was  in  the  chalice  was  not  wine,  but 
the  true  blood  of  our  Lord  ? — as  if  one  were  to  say  in 
French :  Cecy  est  la  coupe  du  Nouveau  Testament^  en 
mon  sang,  laquelle  sera  respandue  pour  vous  :  this  is  the 
chalice,  the  New  Testomient  in  my  Hood,  which  (chalice) 
shall  he  shed  for  you  ?  For  in  this  way  of  speaking 
one  sees  clearly  that  what  is  in  the  cup  must  be  the 
blood,  not  wine,  since  the  wine  has  not  been  shed  for 
us,  but  the  blood.  In  the  Epistle  of  S.  John,  have 
they  not  taken  away  these  noble  words :  every  spirit 
who  dissolveth  Jesus  is  not  of  God  (iv.  3)  ?  What  say 
you,  gentlemen  ?  If  your  church  continues  in  this 
liberty  of  conscience,  making  no  scruple  to  take  away 
what  she  pleases,  soon  the  Scripture  will  fail  you,  and 
you  will  have  to  be  satisfied  with  the  Institutes  of  Cal- 
vin, which  must  indeed  have  I  know  not  what  excel- 
lence, since  they  censure  the  Scriptures  themselves ! 

*  At  this  time  the  so-called  reformers  did  not  decidedly  accept  the 
book  of  Esther  as  canonical.  It  is  noAV  accepted  by  their  followers  up 
to  chap.  X.  V.  4.     [Tr.] 

ART.  I.  c.  VIII.]         The  Rule  of  Faith,  1 1 9 



Shall  1  say  further  this  word  ?  Your  fine  church  has 
not  contented  itself  with  cutting  off  from  the  Scripture 
entire  books,  chapters,  sentences  and  words,  but  what 
it  has  not  dared  to  cut  off  altogether  it  has  corrupted 
and  violated  by  its  translations.  In  order  that  the 
sectaries  of  this  age  may  altogether  pervert  this  first 
and  most  holy  rule  of  our  faith,  they  have  not  been 
satisfied  with  shortening  it  or  with  getting  rid  of  so 
many  beautiful  parts,  but  they  have  turned  and  turned 
it  about,  each  one  as  he  chose,  and  instead  of  adjust- 
ing their  ideas  by  this  rule  they  have  adopted  it  to 
the  square  of  their  own  greater  or  less  sufficiency. 
The  Church  had  universally  received  (more  than  a 
thousand  years  ago)  the  Latin  version  which  the 
Catholic  Church  proposes ;  S.  Jerome,  that  most 
learned  man,  was  the  author,  or  corrector  of  it ;  when, 
in  our  age,  behold  arise  a  thick  mist  created  by  the 
spirit  of  giddiness,^  which  has  so  led  astray  these  re- 
furbishers  of  old  opinions  formerly  current,  that  every- 
body has  wanted  to  drag,  one  to  this  side,  one  to  that, 
and  always  according  to  the  inclination  of  his  own 
judgment,  this  holy  and  sacred  Scripture  of  God. 
Herein  who  sees  not  the  profanation  of  this  sacred 
vase  of  the  holy  letter,  in  which  was  preserved  the 
precious  balm  of  the  Evangelical  doctrine  ?  For  would 
it  not  have  been   a   profanation   of  the  Ark  of  the 

*  Isa.  xix.  14. 

1 20  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h 

Covenant  to  maintain  that  everybody  might  seize  it, 
carry  it  home,  take  it  all  to  pieces,  and  then  give  it 
what  form  he  liked  provided  that  it  had  some  semblance 
of  an  ark  ?  And  what  but  this  is  it  to  maintain  that 
one  may  take  the  Scriptures  and  turn  and  adjust 
them  according  to  one's  own  sense  ?  And  in  just  the 
same  way,  as  soon  as  we  are  assured  that  the  ordinary 
edition  of  the  church  is  so  out  of  shape  that  it  must 
be  built  up  again  new,  and  that  a  private  man  is  to 
set  his  hand  to  it  and  begin  the  process,  the  door  is 
open  to  presumption.  For  if  Luther  dares  to  do  it, 
— why  not  Erasmus  ?  And  if  Erasmus,  why  not 
Calvin  or  Melancthon,  why  not  Henricus  Mercerus, 
Sebastian  Castalio,  Beza,  and  the  rest  of  the  world, 
provided  that  they  know  some  verses  of  Pindar  and 
four  or  five  words  of  Hebrew,  and  have  close  by  some 
good  Thesaurus  of  the  one  or  other  language  ?  And 
how  can  so  many  translations  be  made  by  brains  so 
different,  without  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  sin- 
cerity of  the  Scripture  ?  What  say  you  ?  that  the 
ordinary  version  is  corrupt  ?  We  allow  that  tran- 
scribers and  printers  have  let  certain  ambiguities  of 
very  slight  importance  slip  in  (if,  however,  anything 
in  the  Scripture  can  be  called  of  slight  importance). 
The  Council  of  Trent  commanded  that  these  should 
be  taken  out,  and  that  for  the  future  care  should  be 
taken  to  print  as  correctly  as  possible.  For  the  rest, 
there  is  nothing  in  it  which  is  not  most  conformable 
to  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Spirit  who  is  its  author, 
as  has  been  shown  by  so  many  learned  men  of  our 
Church,*  opposing  the  presumption  of  these  new  re- 

*  Genebrard  in  fTonf.  Psalt. ;  Titelman,  Toletus,  in  apol.     Bellar- 
minus  et  alii. 

ART.  I.  0.  VIII.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  121 

formers  of  religion,  that  it  would  be  losing  time  to 
try  to  speak  more  of  it ;  besides  that  it  would  be  folly 
in  me  to  wish  to  speak  of  the  correctness  of  transla- 
tions, who  never  well  knew  how  to  read  with  the 
points  in  one  of  the  languages  necessary  for  this 
knowledge,  and  am  hardly  more  learned  in  the  other. 
But  how  have  you  improved  matters  ?  Everybody 
has  held  to  his  own  views,  everybody  has  despised 
his  neighbour's ;  they  have  turned  it  about  as  they 
liked,  but  no  one  speaks  of  his  comrade's  version. 
What  is  this  but  to  overthrow  the  majesty  of  the 
Scripture,  and  to  bring  it  into  contempt  with  the 
people,  who  think  that  this  diversity  of  editions 
comes  rather  from  the  uncertainty  of  the  Scriptures 
than  from  the  variety  of  the  translators,  a  variety 
which  alone  ought  to  put  us  in  assurance  concern- 
ing the  ancient  translation,  which,  as  the  Council 
says,  the  Church  has  so  long,  so  constantly,  and  so 
unanimously  approved. 

An  example  or  two  will  suifice.  In  the  Acts,* 
where  there  is :  Thou  shalt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell 
(animam  in  inferno),  they  make  it:  Thou  shalt  not 
leave  my  corpse  in  the  tomb  {cadaver  in  sepulchro). 
Whoever  saw  such  versions  ?  Instead  of  soul  (and  it 
is  Our  Lord  who  is  spoken  of)  to  say  carrion,  and 
instead  of  hell  to  say  sepulchre !  Peter  Martyr  {in 
def,  de  Euch.  p.  3^  p.  692)  cites  i  Cor.  x.  3,  and 
they  all  eat  the  same  spiritual  food  as  we  {nohiscum) : 
he  inserts  this  nohiscum  to  prove  his  point.  I  have 
seen  in  several  bibles  in  this  country  a  very  subtle 
falsehood,  in  the  mysterious  words  of  the  institution  of 
the  most  Holy  Sacrament :  instead  of  hoc  est  corjpiLS 

*  ii.  27. 

122  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  il 

meum,  cecy  est  mon  corps ;  they  had  put :  c'est  cy  mon 
corps.*     Who  does  not  perceive  the  deceit  ? 

You  see  something  then  of  the  violence  and  pro- 
fanation your  ministers  do  and  offer  to  the  Scriptures : 
what  think  you  of  their  ways  ?  What  will  become  of 
us  if  everybody  takes  leave,  as  soon  as  he  knows  two 
words  of  Greek,  and  the  letters  in  Hebrew,  thus  to 
turn  everything  topsy  turvy  ?  I  have  therefore  shown 
you  what  I  promised, — that  this  first  rule  of  our 
faith  has  been  and  still  is  most  sadly  violated  in  your 
pretended  church;  and  that  you  may  know  it  to  be 
a  property  of  heresy  thus  to  dismember  the  Scriptures, 
I  will  close  this  part  of  my  subject  with  what 
Tertullian  says,t  speaking  of  the  sects  of  his  time. 
"  This  heresy "  [of  the  Gnostics],  says  he,  "  does  not 
receive  some  of  the  Scriptures ;  and  if  it  receives 
some  it  does  not  receive  them  whole  .  .  .  and  what 
it  receives  in  a  certain  sense  whole,  it  still  perverts, 
devising  various  interpretations." 



But  if  the  case  be  thus  with  the  Latin  versions,  how 
great  are  the  contempt  and  profanation  shown  in  the 
French,  German,  Polish,  and  other  languages  !  And 
yet  here  is  one  of  the  most  successful  artifices  adopted 

*  Here  is  my  body,  instead  of  This  is  my  body.     [Tr.  ] 
+  de  Proescr,  xvii. 

ART.  1. 0.  IX.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  123 

by  the  enemy  of  Christianity  and  of  unity  in  our  age, 
to  attract  the  people.  He  knew  the  curiosity  of  men, 
and  how  much  one  esteems  one's  own  judgment ;  and 
therefore  he  has  induced  his  sectaries  to  translate  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  every  one  into  the  tongue  of  the 
province  where  he  finds  himself  placed,  and  to  main- 
tain this  unheard-of  opinion,  that  every  one  is  capable 
of  understanding  the  Scriptures,  that  all  should  read 
them,  and  that  the  public  offices  should  be  celebrated 
and  sung  in  the  vulgar  tongue  of  each  district. 

But  who  sees  not  the  artifice  ?  There  is  nothing  in 
the  world  which,  passing  through  many  hands,  does  not 
change  and  lose  it  first  lustre :  wine  which  has  been 
often  poured  out  and  poured  back  loses  its  freshness 
and  strength,  wax  when  handled  changes  its  colour, 
coins  lose  their  stamp.  Be  sure  also  that  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, passing  through  so  many  translators,  in  so  many 
versions  and  re-versions,  cannot  but  be  altered.  And 
if  in  the  Latin  versions  there  is  such  a  variety  of 
opinion  among  these  turners  of  Scripture,  how  much 
more  in  their  vernacular  and  mother-tongue  editions, 
which  not  every  one  is  able  to  check  or  to  criticise  ? 
It  gives  a  very  great  license  to  translators  to  know 
that  they  will  only  be  tested  by  those  of  their  own 
province.  Every  district  has  not  such  clear  seeing 
eyes  as  France  and  Germany.  "Are  we  sure,"  says  a 
learned  profane  writer,*  "  that  in  the  Basque  provinces 
and  in  Brittany  there  are  persons  of  sufficient  judgment 
to  give  authority  to  this  translation  made  into  their 
tongue ;  the  universal  Church  has  no  more  arduous 
decision  to  give ; "  it  is  Satan's  plan  for  corrupting  the 
integrity  of  this  holy  Testament.  He  well  knows 
*  Montaigne.     Essaies  I.  56.     See  Preface. 

124  ^^^  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  h. 

the  result  of  disturbing  and  poisoning  the  source ;  it 
is  at  once  to  spoil  all  that  comes  after. 

But  let  us  be  frank.  Do  we  not  know  that  the 
Apostles  spoke  all  tongues  ?  How  is  it  then  that 
their  gospels  and  their  epistles  are  only  in  Hehrew,  as  S. 
Jerome  witnesses  *  of  the  Gospel  of  S.  Matthew ;  in 
Latin,  as  some  think  concerning  that  of  S.  Mark ;  t 
and  in  Greek,  as  is  held  concerning  the  other  Gospels? 
which  were  the  three  languages  chosen  at  Our  Lord's 
very  cross  for  the  preaching  of  the  Crucified.  Did 
they  not  carry  the  Gospel  throughout  the  world  ?  and 
in  the  world  were  there  no  other  languages  but  these 
three  ?  Truly  there  were,  and  yet  they  did  not  judge 
it  expedient  to  vary  their  writings  in  so  many  lan- 
guages. Who  then  shall  despise  the  custom  of  our 
Church,  which  has  for  its  warrant  the  imitation  of  the 
Apostles  ?  I     Now  for  this,  besides  the  great  weight 

*  Prol.  in  Matt. 

t  In  Pontifical!  Damasi.  The  Saint  mentions  the  opinion,  but  he 
himself  held  the  now  universal  sentiment  of  Doctors  that  S.  Mark 
wrote  in  Greek.     [Tr.] 

+  Of  this  we  have  a  notable  trace  and  evidence  in  the  Gospel :  for 
the  day  Our  Lord  entered  into  Jerusalem,  the  crowds  kept  crying  out : 
Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David ;  blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord:  hosanna  in  the  highest  (Matt.  xxi.  9.)  And  this  word, 
hosanna,  has  been  left  in  its  integrity  in  the  Greek  text  of  S.  Mark 
and  S.  John,  to  signify  that  it  was  the  very  word  of  the  people.  Now 
hosanna,  or  hosianna  (for  one  is  the  same  as  the  other  in  this  language, 
the  learned  tell  us)  is  a  Hebrew,  not  a  Syriac  word,  taken,  with  the 
rest  of  that  praise  which  was  given  to  Our  Lord,  from  the  117th 
Psalm.  These  people  then  were  accustomed  to  recite  the  Psalms  in 
Hebrew  ;  yet  the  Hebrew  was  no  longer  their  vulgar  tongue  ; — as  one 
may  see  by  several  words  said  in  the  Gospel  by  Our  Lord,  which  were 
Syriac  and  which  the  Evangelists  have  retained  :  as  Abba,  Hacddama, 
Golgotha,  Pascha,  and  others.  Learned  men  tell  us  that  these  were  not 
Hebrew  but  Syraic,  though  they  may  be  called  Hebrew  as  being  of  the 
vernacular  tongue  of  the  Hebrews  after  the  captivity  of  Babylon. 

ART.  I.  c.  IX.]  The  Rtile  of  Faith.  125 

it  should  have  to  put  down  all  our  curious  question- 
ings, there  is  a  reason  which  I  hold  to  be  most  sound : 
it  is  that  these  other  languages  are  not  fixed,  they 
change  between  town  and  town ;  in  accents,  in  phrases, 
and  in  words,  they  are  altered,  and  vary  from  season 
to  season  and  from  age  to  age.  Take  up  the  Memoir es 
of  the  Sire  de  Joinville,  or  of  Philip  de  Comines,  and 
you  will  see  that  time  has  entirely  altered  their 
language ;  and  yet  these  historians  must  have  been 
among  the  most  polished  of  their  age,  both  having 
been  brought  up  at  Court.  If  then  we  were  to  have 
(particularly  for  the  public  services)  bibles  each  in 
our  own  tongue,  every  fifty  years  it  would  be  neces- 
sary to  have  a  revolution,  and  in  every  case  with 
adding  to,  or  taking  away  from,  or  altering,  much  of 
the  holy  exactness  of  the  Scripture,  which  could  not 
be  done  without  a  great  loss.  In  short,  it  is  more 
than  reasonable  that  so  holy  a  rule  as  is  the  holy 
Word  of  God  should  be  kept  in  fixed  languages,  since 
it  could  not  be  maintained  in  this  perfect  integrity 
within  bastard  and  unstable  languages. 

But  I  inform  you  that  the  holy  Council  of  Trent 
does  not  reject  translations  in  the  vulgar  tongue 
printed  by  the  authority  of  the  Ordinaries ;  only  it 
commands  *  that  we  should  not  begin  to  read  them 
without  leave  of  superiors.  This  is  a  very  reasonable 
precaution  against  putting  this  sharp  and  two-edged 
sword  t  into  the  hands  of  one  who  might  kill  himself 
therewith.     But  of  this  we  will  speak  by  and  by. 

The  Church,  then,  does  not  approve  that  everybody 
who  can  read,  without  further   assurance  of   his  ca- 
pacity than  that  which  he  persuades  himself  of  in  his 
*  Reg.  iv.  Indicis,  t  Heb.  iv.  12. 

126  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partiu 

own  presumption,  should  handle  this  sacred  memorial, 
nor  truly  is  it  right  that  she  should  so  approve. 

I  remember  to  have  read  in  an  Essay  of  the  Sieur 
de  Montaigne's  (see  above),  "  It  is  certainly  wrong 
that  there  should  be  seen  tossing  about  in  everybody's 
hands,  in  parlour  and  in  kitchen,  the  holy  book  of  the 
sacred  mysteries  of  our  belief.  .  .  .  It  is  not  casually 
or  hurriedly  that  we  are  to  prosecute  so  serious  and 
venerable  a  study ;  it  should  be  a  reflective  and  steady 
act,  to  which  should  always  be  added  that  preface  of 
our  office  :  sicrsum  corda,  and  for  which  the  body  itself 
should  be  brought  into  a  haviour  which  may  betoken 
a  particular  attention  and  reverence  .  .  .  and  I  more- 
over believe  that  liberty  for  everybody  to  translate  it, 
and  by  this  means  to  dissipate  words  so  religious  and 
important  into  all  sorts  of  languages,  has  much  more 
danger  than  profit." 

The  Council  also  commands*  that  the  public  services 
of  the  Church  shall  not  be  celebrated  in  the  vulgar 
tongue,  but  in  a  fixed  language,  each  one  according  to 
the  ancient  formularies  approved  by  the  Church. 
This  decree  takes  its  reasons  from  what  I  have  already 
said ;  for  if  it  is  not  expedient  thus  to  translate,  at 
every  turn,  province  by  province,  the  venerable  text 
of  the  Scripture,  the  greatest  part,  and  we  may  say 
all,  that  is  in  the  offices  being  taken  from  the  Holy 
Scripture,  it  is  also  not  becoming  to  give  these  in 
French.  Indeed,  is  there  not  a  greater  danger  in 
reciting  the  Holy  Scripture  in  the  vulgar  tongue  at 
public  services,  on  this  account  that  not  only  the  old 
but  little  children,  not  only  the  wise  but  the  foolish, 
not  only  men  but  women,  in  short  both  he  who  knows 

*  Sess.  xxii. 

ART.  I.  c.  IX.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  127 

and  he  who  knows  not  how  to  read,  may  all  take 
occasion  of  erring,  each  one  as  he  likes  ?  Read  the 
passages  of  David  where  he  seems  to  murmur  against 
God  concerning  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked ;  you 
will  see  the  unwise  people  justify  themselves  by  this 
in  their  impatience.  Eead  where  he  seems  to  demand 
vengeance  against  his  enemies,  and  the  spirit  of 
vengeance  will  cloak  itself  under  this.  Let  them  see 
those  heavenly  and  entirely  divine  loves  in  the 
Canticle  of  Canticles ;  from  not  knowing  how  to  spiri- 
tualize them  these  will  only  profit  them  unto  evil. 
And  that  word  of  Osee  :  *  Vade  et  fac  tihi  filios  forni- 
cationeSj  and  those  acts  of  the  ancient  Patriarchs, — 
would  they  not  give  license  to  fools  ?  But  pray  give 
us  some  little  reason  why  we  should  have  the  Scrip- 
tures and  Divine  Services  in  the  vulgar  tongue.  To 
learn  doctrine  thereby  ?  But  surely  the  doctrine 
cannot  be  therein  found  unless  we  open  the  bark  of 
the  letter,  in  which  is  contained  the  intelligence : 
I  will  show  this  directly  in  its  place.  What  is  useful 
for  this  purpose  is  not  the  reciting  of  the  service 
but  preaching,  in  which  the  Word  of  God  is  not  only 
pronounced  but  expounded  by  the  pastor.  And  who 
is  he,  however  well  furnished  at  all  points  (tant 
houppe  soit  il  et  ferrd),  who  can  understand  without 
study  the  prophecies  of  Ezechiel,  and  others,  and  the 
Psalms  ?  What,  then,  will  the  people  do  with  them 
when  they  hear  them  except  profane  them  and  cast  a 
doubt  on  them. 

At  any  rate  we  who  are  Catholics  must  in  no  wise 
bring  down  our  sacred  offices  into  vernacular  languages ; 
but  rather,  as  our  Church  is  universal  in  time  and  in 

*  i.  2. 

128  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  n. 

place,  it  ought  also  to  celebrate  public  offices  in  a 
language  which  is  universal  in  time  and  in  place,  as  is 
Latin  in  the  West,  Greek  in  the  East ;  otherwise  our 
priests  could  not  say  Mass  nor  others  understand  them 
outside  their  own  countries.  The  unity  and  the  great 
extension  of  our  brethren  require  that  we  should  say 
our  public  prayers  in  a  language  which  shall  be  com- 
mon to  all  peoples.  In  this  way  our  prayers  are 
universal,  by  means  of  the  number  of  persons  who  in 
each  province  can  understand  Latin,  and  it  seems  to 
me,  in  conscience,  that  this  reason  alone  should  suffice ; 
for  if  we  consider  rightly,  our  prayers  are  heard  no  less 
in  Latin  than  in  French.  Let  us  divide  the  body  of 
a  commonwealth  into  three  parts,  according  to  the 
ancient  French  division,  or,  according  to  the  new,  into 
four  ;  there  are  four  sets  of  persons :  the  clergy,  the 
nobility,  they  of  the  long  robe,  and  the  people  or  third 
estate.  The  three  first  understand  Latin  or  should 
understand  it,  if  they  do  not  rather  make  it  their  own 
language ;  there  remains  the  lowest  rank,  of  which, 
again,  a  part  understand ;  and  truly  as  for  the  rest,  if 
one  do  not  speak  the  jargon  of  their  country,  it  is  only 
with  great  difficulty  that  they  could  understand  the 
simple  narrative  of  the  Scripture.  That  most  excellent 
theologian,  Eobert  Bellarmine,^^'  relates,  having  heard 
it  from  a  most  trustworthy  source,  that  a  good  dame 
in  England  having  heard  a  minister  read  the  twenty- 
fifth  chapter  of  Ecclesiasticus  (though  they  only  hold 
it  to  be  an  ancient  book,  not  a  canonical  one),  because 
it  there  speaks  of  the  wickedness  of  women,  rose  up, 
saying  :  What ! — is  this  the  Word  of  God  ? — of  the 
devil  rather.     He  quotes  from  Theodoret  t  an  excellent 

*  On  this  question.  t  Hist.  ir. 

ART.  I.  0.  X.]  The  Rtile  of  Faith,  1 29 

and  true  word  of  S.  Basil  the  Great.  The  chief  of  the 
Emperor's  kitchen  wishing  to  play  the  sage,  began  to 
bring  forward  certain  passages  of  the  Scripture  :  "  It 
is  yours  [said  the  Saint]  to  mind  your  dishes,  not  to 
cook  divine  dogmata :  "  as  if  he  had  said  :  Occupy 
yourself  with  tasting  your  sauces,  not  with  devouring 
the  divine  Word. 



The  imagination  must  have  great  power  over  Huguenot 
understandings,  since  it  persuades  them  so  absolutely 
of  this  grand  absurdity,  that  the  Scriptures  are  easy 
to  everybody,  and  that  everybody  can  understand  them. 
It  is  true  that  to  bring  forth  vulgar  translations  with 
honour  it  was  necessary  to  speak  in  this  mariner;  but 
tell  me  the  truth,  do  you  think  that  the  case  really 
runs  so  ?  Do  you  find  them  so  easy,  do  you  under- 
stand them  so  well  ?  If  you  think  you  do,  I  admire 
your  credulity,  which  goes  not  only  beyond  experi- 
ence, but  is  contrary  to  what  you  see  and  feel.  If  it 
is  true  that  the  Scripture  is  so  easy  to  understand, 
what  is  the  use  of  so  many  commentaries  made  by 
your  ministers,  what  is  the  object  of  so  many  har- 
monies, what  is  the  good  of  so  many  schools  of  Theo- 
logy ?  There  is  need  of  no  more,  say  you,  than  the 
doctrine  of  the  pure  word  of  God  in  the  Church.  But 
where  is  this  word  of  God  ?  In  the  Scripture  ?  And 
III.  I 

130  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  h. 

Scripture — is  it  some  secret  thing  ?  No — you  say  not 
to  the  faithful.  Why,  then,  these  interpreters  and  these 
preachers  ?  If  you  are  faithful,  yon  will  understand 
the  Scriptures  as  well  as  they  do ;  send  them  off  to 
unbelievers,  and  simply  keep  some  deacons  to  give 
you  the  morsel  of  bread  and  pour  out  the  wine  of 
your  supper.  If  you  can  feed  yourselves  in  the  field 
of  the  Scripture,  what  do  you  want  with  pastors  ? 
Some  young  innocent,  some  mere  child  who  is  able  to 
read,  will  do  just  as  well.  But  whence  comes  this 
continual  and  irreconcilable  discord  which  there  is 
among  you,  brethren  in  Luther,  over  these  words, 
This  is  my  body,  and  on  Justification  ?  Certainly  S. 
Peter  is  not  of  your  thinking,  who  assures  us  in  his 
2nd  Epistle*  that  in  the  letters  of  S.  Paul  there  are 
certain  points  hard  to  he  understood,  which  the  unlearned 
and  unstable  wrest,  as  also  the  other  Scriptures,  to  their 
own  perdition.  The  eunuch  who  was  treasurer-general 
of  Ethiopia  was  certainly  faithful,  t  since  he  came  to 
adore  in  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem ;  he  was  reading 
Isaias ;  he  quite  understood  the  words,  since  he  asked 
of  what  prophet  that  which  he  had  read  was  to  be 
understood  ;  yet  still  he  had  not  the  understanding 
nor  the  spirit  of  them,  as  he  himself  confessed :  How 
can  I,  unless  some  one  shows  me  ?  Not  only  does  he 
not  understand,  but  he  confesses  that  he  has  not  the 
power  unless  he  is  taught.  And  we  shall  see  some 
washerwoman  boast  of  understanding  the  Scripture  as 
well  as  S.  Bernard  did !  Do  you  not  know  the  spirit 
of  discord  ?  It  is  necessary  to  convince  oneself  that 
the  Scripture  is  easy  in  order  that  everybody  may 
drag  it  about,  some  one  way,  some  another,  that  each 
*  iii.  16.  i  Acts  viii. 

ART.  I.  c.  X.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  131 

one  may  be  a  master  in  it,  and  that  it  may  serve 
everybody's  opinions  and  fancies.  Certainly  David 
held  it  to  be  far  from  easy  when  he  said :  *  Give,  me 
understanding,  that  I  may  learn  thy  commandments. 
If  they  have  left  you  the  Epistle  of  S.  Jerome  to 
Panlinus  in  the  preface  of  your  bibles,  read  it,  for  it 
treats  this  point  expressly.  S.  Augustine  speaks  of  it 
in  a  thousand  places,  but  particularly  in  his  Confes- 
sions. In  the  119th  Epistle  he  confesses  that  there 
is  much  more  in  the  Scripture  of  which  he  is  ignorant 
than  there  is  of  what  he  knows.  Origen  and  S. 
Jerome,  the  former  in  his  preface  on  the  Canticles, 
the  latter  in  his  on  Ezechiel,  say  that  it  was  not  per- 
mitted to  the  Jews  before  the  age  of  thirty  to  read 
the  three  first  chapters  of  Genesis,  the  commencement 
and  the  end  of  Ezechiel,  or  the  Canticle  of  Canticles, 
on  account  of  the  depth  of  the  difficulties  therein,  in 
which  few  persons  can  swim  without  being  submerged. 
And  now,  everybody  talks  of  them,  everybody  criticises 
them,  everybody  knows  all  about  them. 

And  how  great  the  profanation  of  the  Scriptures  is 
in  this  way  nobody  could  sufficiently  believe  who  had 
not  seen  it.  As  for  me,  I  will  say  what  I  know,  and  I 
lie  not.  I  have  seen  a  person  in  good  society  who,  when 
one  objected  to  an  expression  of  hers  the  sentence  of 
Our  Lord  t — To  him  that  striketh  thee  on  the  one  cheek 
offer  also  the  other, — immediately  explained  it  in  this 
sense  :  that  as  to  encourage  a  child  who  studies  well 
we  lay  our  hand  lightly  with  little  pats  upon  his  cheek 
to  excite  him  to  do  better,  so  Our  Lord  meant  to  say : 
be  so  grateful  to  one  who  may  find  you  doing  right 
and  who  may  caress  you  for  it  that  he  may  take 
*  Ps.  cxviii.  73.  +  Luke  vi  29. 

132  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parth. 

occasion  another  time  to  treat  you  still  better  and  to 
caress  or  fondle  you  on  both  sides.  Is  not  that  a  fine 
meaning  and  a  precious  ?  But  the  reason  was  even 
better, — that  to  understand  this  text  otherwise  would 
be  against  nature,  and  that  while  we  must  interpret 
Scripture  by  Scripture,  we  find  in  Scripture  that  Our 
Lord  did  not  do  so  when  the  servant  struck  him :  this 
is  the  fruit  of  your  translated  theology.  An  honest 
man,  and  one  who  in  my  opinion  would  not  lie,  has 
related  to  me  that  he  heard  a  minister  of  this  country, 
treating  of  the  Nativity  of  Our  Lord,  assert  that  he 
was  not  born  in  a  crib,  and  expound  the  text  (which  is 
express  on  the  other  side) figuratively,  saying:  Our  Lord 
also  says  that  he  is  the  vine,  yet  for  all  that  he  is  not 
one ;  in  the  same  way,  although  it  is  said  that  he  is 
born  in  a  crib,  yet  born  there  he  is  not,  but  in  some 
honourable  place  which  in  comparison  with  his  greatness 
might  be  called  a  crib.  The  character  of  this  inter- 
pretation leads  me  still  more  to  believe  the  man  who 
told  me,  for  being  simple  and  unable  to  read  he  could 
hardly  have  made  it  up.  It  is  a  most  curious  thing  to 
see  how  this  pretended  enlightenment  causes  the  Holy 
Scripture  to  be  profaned.  Is  it  not  doing  what  God 
says  in  Ezechiel :  '''  Was  it  not  enough  for  you  to  feed 
ufon  good  2MStures  ;  hiU  you  must  also  tread  down  with 
your  feet  the  residue  of  the  'pastitres  ? 

*  xxxiv.  18. 

ART.  1. 0.  XL]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  133 



But  amongst  all  profanations  it  seems  to  me  that 
this  comes  out  above  the  rest,  that  in  the  temples 
publicly,  and  everywhere,  in  the  fields,  in  the  shops, 
they  sing  the  rhymes  of  Marot  as  Psalms  of  David. 
The  mere  incompetence  of  the  author,  who  was  utterly 
ignorant ;  his  licentiousness,  which  he  testifies  by  his 
writings ;  his  most  profane  life,  which  had  nothing 
whatever  of  the  Christian  about  it,  caused  him  to  be 
refused  the  communion  of  the  Church.  And  yet  his 
name  and  his  psalms  are,  as  it  were,  sacred  in  your 
churches ;  they  are  recited  among  you  as  if  they 
were  David's, — whereas  who  sees  not  how  the  sacred 
word  is  violated  ?  The  measure  and  restrictions  of 
verse  make  it  impossible  that  the  sacred  meaning  of 
the  Scripture  words  should  be  followed ;  he  mixes  in 
his  own  to  make  sense,  and  it  becomes  necessary  for 
this  ignorant  rhymester  to  choose  one  sense  in  places 
where  there  might  be  several.  What !  is  it  not  an 
extreme  violation  and  profanation  to  have  left  to 
such  an  empty-headed  witling  a  judgment  of  such 
great  consequence,  and  then  in  the  public  prayers  to 
follow  as  closely  this  buffoon's  selection  as  one  ever 
did  formerly  the  interpretation  of  the  Seventy,  who 
were  so  particularly  assisted  by  the  Holy  Spirit  ? 
How  many  words  and  how  many  sentences  has  he 
secreted  therein  which  were  never  in  the  Scriptures  ? 

1 34  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  il 

This  is  a  very  different  thing  from  ill-pronouncing 
BdhhoUtli.'^  At  the  same  time  it  is  well  known  that 
there  is  nothing  which  has  so  delighted  busybodies, 
and  above  all  women,  as  this  authorisation  to  sing  in 
the  church  and  at  the  meetings.  Certainly  we  forbid 
no  one  to  sing  devoutly,  modestly,  and  becomingly  ; 
but  it  seems  more  proper  that  Ecclesiastics  and  their 
deputies  should  sing  as  a  general  rule,  as  was  done  in 
the  Dedication  of  Solomon's  Temple.  0  how  delightful 
to  get  one's  voice  heard  in  the  church  !  But  do  they 
not  betray  you  in  the  songs  they  make  you  utter  ? 
I  have  not  leisure  or  convenience  for  going  into  the 
matter  further.  When  you  shout  these  verses  of  the 
8th  Psalm  : — Thou  hast  made  him  such  that  no  more 
remains  to  him  eoceejpt  to  he  God ;  hut  as  to  all  else  thou 
hast,  &c. — how  delighted  you  are  to  be  able  to  chant 
and  sing  these  French  rhymes  Marot^es.^  It  would 
be  much  better  to  be  silent  in  Latin  than  to  blaspheme 
in  French.  Accept  this  warning.  When  you  sing 
this  verse,  whom  do  you  suppose  you  speak  of?  You 
speak  of  Our  Lord,  unless,  to  excuse  the  audacity  of 
Marot  and  of  your  church,  you  also  erase  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  from  the  holy  Bible:  for  S.  Paul 
clearly  there  (ii.  6,  7,  8)  expounds  this  verse  of  Our 
Lord.  And  if  you  speak  of  Our  Lord,  why  do  you 
say  he  is  such  that  no  more  now  remains  for  him 
except  to  be  God  ?  Questionless  if  anything  now 
remains  to  him  to  be  God  he  will  never  be  it.  What 
say  you,  poor  people  ? — that  it  "  remains "  for  Jesus 
Christ  to  be  God?  See  how  those  men  make  you 
swallow  the  poisoned  morsel  of  Arianism,  in  singing 
these  sorry  rhymes.     I  am  no  longer  astonished  that 

*  Judges  xii,  6.  t  i.e.  of  Marut.     [Ti.] 

\ET.  1.  c.  XI.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  135 

Calvin  confessed  to  Valentine  Gentilis,  that  the  Name 
of  God  by  excellence  belongs  only  to  the  Father. 
Behold  the  splendid  eversions  of  the  Scripture  with 
which  you  are  well  pleased ;  behold  the  blasphemies 
which  your  Church  sings  in  a  body,  and  which  she 
makes  you  repeat  so  often. 

And  as  to  this  fashion  of  having  the  Psalms  sung 
indifferently  in  all  places  and  during  all  occupations, 
who  sees  not  that  it  is  a  contempt  of  religion  ?  Is  it 
not  to  offend  His  Divine  Majesty  to  say  to  him  words 
as  excellent  as  those  of  the  Psalms,  without  any 
reverence  or  attention  ?  To  say  prayers  after  the 
manner  of  common  talking,  is  this  not  a  mocking  of 
him  to  whom  we  speak  ?  When  we  see  at  Geneva 
or  elsewhere  a  shop-boy  laughing  during  the  singing 
of  the  Psalms,  and  breaking  the  thread  of  a  most 
beautiful  prayer,  to  say :  What  will  you  buy,  sir  ? — 
do  we  not  clearly  see  that  he  is  making  an  accessary 
of  the  principal,  and  that  it  is  only  for  pastime  that 
he  was  singing  this  divine  song,  which  he  at  the  same 
time  believes  to  be  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  Is  it  not 
good  to  hear  cooks  singing  the  penitential  Psalms  of 
David,  and  asking  at  each  verse  for  the  bacon,  the 
capon,  the  partridge  !  "  That  voice,"  says  De  Mon- 
taigne, "  is  too  divine  to  have  no  other  use  than  to 
exercise  the  lungs  and  please  the  ears."  *  I  allow 
that  all  places  are  good  to  pray  in  privately,  and  the 
same  holds  good  of  every  occupation  which  is  not 
sin,  provided  that  we  pray  in  spirit,  because  God  sees 
the  interior  wherein  lies  the  chief  and  substantial 
part  of  prayer.  But  I  consider  that  he  who  prays  in 
public  ought  to  make  exterior  demonstration  of  the 

*  Samo  Essay. 

136  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parth. 

reverence  which  the  very  words  he  is  uttering  demand  : 
otherwise  he  scandalises  his  neighbour,  who  is  not 
bound  to  think  there  is  religion  in  the  interior  when 
he  sees  the  contempt  in  the  exterior.  I  hold,  then,  that 
both  in  singing  as  divine  Psalms  what  is  very  often 
an  imagination  of  Marot's,  and  in  singing  them  irrever- 
ently and  without  respect,  they  very  often  sin  in  that 
reformed  church  of  yours  against  that  word  :  God  is  a 
spirit,  and  those  who  adore  him  must  adore  him  in 
spirit  and  in  truthf^''  For  besides  that  in  these 
Psalms  you  very  often  attribute  to  the  Holy  Ghost 
the  conceptions  of  Marot  contrary  to  the  truth,  the 
mouth  also  cries  in  streets  and  kitchens  :  0  Lord  ! 
0  Lord  !  when  the  heart  and  the  spirit  are  not  there 
but  in  traffic  and  gain,  as  Isaias  says  :  t  You  draw 
near  God  with  your  mouth,  and  with  your  lips  glorify 
him,  hut  your  heart  is  far  from  him,  and  you  have 
feared  him  according  to  the  commandment  and  doctrines 
of  men.  It  is  quite  true  that  this  impropriety  of 
praying  without  devotion  occurs  very  often  among 
Catholics,  but  it  is  not  with  the  advertence  of  the 
Church :  and  I  am  not  now  blaming  particular 
members  of  your  party,  but  your  body  in  general, 
which  by  its  versions  and  liberties  bring  into  profane 
use  what  should  be  treated  with  the  greatest  rever- 
ence. \  In  chapter  1 4  of  the  I  st  of  Corinthians,  the 
Let  women  ktep  silence  in  the  churches  seems  to  be 
understood  of  hymns  {cantiques)  as  much  as  of  the 
rest :  our  nuns  are  in  oratorio  non  in  ecclesid. 

*  John  iv.  23.  t  xxix.  13. 

X  The  following  sentence  is  in  the  autograph  placed  between  bars, 
and  seems  meant  to  be  amplified.     [Tr.] 

ART.  I.  c.  XII.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  137 



Now  follows  what  you  allege  in  your  defence.  S. 
Paul  seems  *  to  want  to  have  the  service  performed  in 
a  language  intelligible  to  the  Corinthians ;  you  will 
see  that  at  the  same  time  he  does  not  wish  the  service 
to  be  diversified  with  all  sorts  of  languages,  but  only 
that  the  exhortations  and  hymns  which  were  uttered 
by  means  of  the  gift  of  tongues  should  be  interpreted, 
in  order  that  the  Church  where  any  one  might  be 
should  know  what  was  said :  And  therefore  he  that 
speaketh  hy  a  tongue,  let  him  pray  that  he  may  interpret. 
He  intends,  then,  that  the  praises  which  were  made  at 
Corinth  should  be  made  in  Greek :  for  as  they  were 
made  not  now  as  ordinary  services,  but  as  the  extra- 
ordinary hymns  of  those  who  had  this  gift,  for 
the  gladdening  of  the  people,  it  was  reasonable  that 
they  should  be  made  in  intelligible  language,  or  be  at 
once  interpreted.  This  he  seems  to  show  when  he 
says  lower  down :  If,  therefore,  the  lohole  church  come 
together  into  one  place,  and  all  speak  with  tongues^  and 
there  come  in  unlearned  persons  or  infidels,  will  they  not 
say  that  you  are  mad  ?  And  further  on  :  If  any  speak 
with  a  tongue,  let  it  he  hy  tivo,  or  at  the  most  hy  three,  and 
in  course,  and  let  one  interpret.  But  if  there  he  no  inter- 
preter, let  him  hold  his  peace  in  the  church,  and  speak  to 
hirnselfand  to  God.     Who  sees  not  that  he  is  not  speak- 

*  I  Cor.  xiv. 

138  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [paktil 

ing  of  the  solemn  offices  in  the  Church,  which  were  only 
performed  by  the  pastor,  but  of  the  hymns  which  were 
made  through  the  gift  of  tongues,  which  he  wished  to 
be  understood  ?  for  in  truth  if  they  were  not,  it  dis- 
tracted the  assembly,  and  was  of  no  benefit.  Several 
ancient  Fathers  speak  of  these  hymns,  and  amongst 
others  Tertullian,  who,  treating  of  the  holiness  of  the 
agapes  or  love  feasts  of  the  ancients,  says  :  *  "  After  the 
washing  of  hands  and  the  lamps,  each  one  is  pressed 
to  sing  publicly  to  God  as  he  is  able,  out  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  or  his  own  heart." 

This  people  glorify  me  loith  their  lips,  hut  their  heart, 
&c.t  This  is  meant  of  those  who,  singing  and  praying 
in  any  language  whatever,  speak  of  God  mechanically, 
without  reverence  and  devotion;  not  of  those  who 
speak  a  language  unknown  to  them  but  known  to  the 
Church,  and  who,  moreover,  have  their  heart  rapt 
unto  God. 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  they  praised  God  in  all 
tongues.  So  they  should  do ;  but  in  universal  and 
Catholic  offices  there  is  need  of  a  universal  and 
Catholic  language.  Except  for  this,  every  tongue 
confesses  that  Jesus  Christ  is  at  the  right  hand  of 
God  the  Father.^ 

In  Deuteronomy, §  it  is  said  that  the  commandments 
of  God  are  not  secret  or  sealed  up ;  and  does  not  the 
Psalmist  say :  The  commandment  of  the  Lord  is  light- 
some :  thy  word  is  a  lamp  to  my  feet  ?  \\  That  is  all 
very  true,  but  it  means  when  preached  and  explained, 
and  properly  understood.      IToiv  shall  they  believe  with- 

*  Apol.  xxxix.     See  the  notes  of  Messire  Mmar  Ennequin,  bishop 
of  Rennes,  on  Book  vi.  c.  2  of  S.  Augustine's  Confessions. 

+  Is.  xxix.  13.  X  Phil.  ii.  II.  §  xxx.  11  xviii.  cxviii. 

ART.  I.  c.  XII.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  139 

out  a  preacher !  *     And    all  that  the  great  Prophet 
David  has  said  is  not  to  be  understood  of  everybody. 

But  you  object  to  me :  in  any  case,  ought  I  not  to 
seek  the  meat  of  my  soul  and  of  my  salvation  ?  Poor 
man,  who  denies  it  ?  But  if  everybody  goes  to  pas- 
ture like  the  old  ewes,  what  is  the  need  of  shepherds  ? 
Seek  the  pastures,  but  with  your  pastor.  Should  we 
not  laugh  at  the  sick  man  who  would  find  his  health 
in  Hippocrates  without  the  help  of  the  doctor,  or  at 
him  who  would  seek  out  his  rights  in  Justinian 
without  betaking  himself  to  the  judge  ?  Seek,  one 
would  say  to  him,  your  health  by  means  of  doctors ; 
seek  your  right  and  gain  it,  but  by  the  hands  of  the 
magistrate.  "  What  man  of  moderately  sound  mind 
does  not  understand  that  the  exposition  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  to  be  sought  from  those  who  are  doctors  in 
them  ? "  says  S.  Augustine.t  But  if  no  one  can  find 
his  salvation  except  the  one  who  can  read  the  Scrip- 
tures, what  will  become  of  so  many  poor  ignorant 
people  ?  Surely  they  find  and  seek  their  salvation 
quite  satisfactorily  when  they  learn  from  the  mouth 
of  the  pastor  the  substance  of  what  they  must  believe, 
hope  for,  love,  do,  and  ask  of  God.  Believe  that  also 
according  to  the  spirit  that  is  true  which  the  Wise  Man 
says :  Better  is  the  poor  man  walking  in  his  simplicity 
than  the  rich  m  crooked  ways  (Prov.  xxviii.  6)  ;  and  else- 
where :  The  simplicity  of  the  just  shall  guide  them  (xi.  3); 
and  :  He  that  walketh  sincerely  walketh  confidently  (x.  9), 
where  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  we  must  not  take 
the  trouble  to  understand,  but  only  that  we  must  not 
expect  to  find  our  salvation  and  our  pasturage  of  our- 
selves, without  the  guidance  of  those  whom  God  has 

*  Koin.  X.  14,  t  De  Moribus  Ecd. 

1 40  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  11 

appointed  unto  this  end,  according  to  the  same  Wise 
Man :  Lean  not  upon  thy  prudence^  and  he  not  ivise  in 
thy  own  conceit  (iii.  5,  7).  Which  they  do  not  practice 
who  think  that  of  their  own  wisdom  they  know  all 
sorts  of  mysteries ;  not  observing  the  order  which  God 
has  established;  who  has  made  amongst  us  some 
doctors  and  pastors, — not  all,  and  not  each  one  for 
himself.  Indeed,  S.  Augustine  found  that  S.  Anthony, 
an  unlearned  man,  failed  not  to  know  the  way  of 
Paradise;  and  he  with  all  his  doctrine  was  very  far 
therefrom,  at  that  time  amid  the  errors  of  the 

But  I  have  some  testimonies  of  antiquity,  and  some 
signal  examples,  which  I  would  leave  you  at  the  end 
of  this  article  as  its  conclusion. 

S.  Augustine  f  "  Your  charity  was  to  be  admonished 
that  confession  (confessionem)  is  not  always  the  voice 
of  a  sinner;  for  as  soon  as  this  word  of  the  Lector 
sounded,  there  followed  the  sound  of  your  striking 
your  breast;  that  is,  as  soon  as  you  heard  that  the 
Lord  said:  I  confess  to  thee,  Father,  immediately  the 
word  /  confess  sounded,  you  struck  your  breasts ;  now 
to  strike  the  breast,  what  is  it  but  to  signify  what  lies 
in  the  breast,  and  with  a  visible  stroke  to  chastise  an 
unseen  sin  ?  Why  did  you  do  this  but  because  you 
heard  /  confess  to  thee,  Father  ?  You  heard  /  confess, 
but  you  did  not  take  notice  who  was  confessing.  Now 
therefore  take  notice."  Do  you  see  how  the  people 
heard  the  public  reading  of  the  Gospel,  and  did  not 
understand  it,  except  this  word :  /  confess  to  thee, 
Father,  which  they  understood  by  custom,  because 
it  was   said   iust  at  the   beginning   of   the  Mass  as 

*  Confess,  viii  8.  f  De  Verbis  Domini.     Serm.  viii. 

ART.  I.  a  XII.]  The  Rtile  of  Faith.  141 

we  say  it  now.  It  was,  no  doubt,  because  the  reading 
was  in  Latin,  which  was  not  their  vulgar  tongue. 

But  he  who  would  see  the  esteem  in  which  Catholics 
hold  the  holy  Scripture,  and  the  respect  they  bear  it, 
should  regard  the  great  Cardinal  Borromeo,  who  never 
studied  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  save  on  his  knees,  it 
seeming  to  him  that  he  heard  God  speaking  in  them, 
and  that  such  reverence  was  due  to  so  divine  a  hearing. 
Never  was  a  people  better  instructed,  considering  the 
malice  of  the  age,  than  the  people  of  Milan  under  the 
Cardinal  Borromeo ;  but  the  instruction  of  the  people 
does  not  come  by  force  of  hurrying  over  the  holy 
Bible,  or  often  reading  the  mere  letter  of  this  divine 
Scripture,  nor  by  singing  snatches  of  the  Psalms  as  the 
fancy  takes  one ;  but  by  using  them,  by  reading,  hear- 
ing, singing,  praying  to  God,  with  a  lively  apprehen- 
sion of  the  majesty  of  God  to  whom  we  speak,  whose 
Word  we  read,  evermore  with  that  Preface  of  the 
ancient  Church :  sursum  corda. 

That  great  servant  of  God,  S.  Francis,  of  whose 
glorious  and  most  holy  memory  the  Feast  was  cele- 
brated yesterday  *  throughout  the  whole  world,  showed 
us  a  beautiful  example  of  the  attention  and  reverence 
with  which  we  ought  to  pray  to  God.  This  is  what 
the  holy  and  fervent  Doctor  of  the  Church,  S.  Bono- 
venture,  tells  of  it.t  "The  holy  man  was  accustomed 
to  recite  the  Canonical  Hours  not  less  reverently  than 
devoutly ;  for  although  he  was  labouring  under  an 
infirmity  of  the  eyes,  the  stomach,  the  spleen,  and  the 
liver,  he  would  not  lean  against  wall  or  other  support 
while  he  was  singing,  but  recited  the  hours  always 
standing  and  bare-headed,  not  with  wandering  eyes, 
*  Written  probably  Oct.  5,  1595.  t  In  Vitd  Fr. 

142  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

nor  with  any  shortening  of  verse  or  word;  if  some- 
times he  were  on  a  journey  he  then  made  a  fixed 
arrangement  of  time,  not  omitting  this  reverent  and 
holy  custom  on  account  of  pouring  rain :  for  he  used 
to  say :  If  the  body  eat  quietly  its  food  which,  with 
itself,  is  to  be  food  of  worms,  how  great  should  be  the 
peace  and  tranquillity  with  which  the  soul  should  take 
the  food  of  life  ? " 





Here  are  the  words  of  the  holy  Council  of  Trent,* 
speaking  of  Christian  and  Evangelical  truth :  "  (The 
holy  Synod),  considering  that  this  truth  and  discipline 
are  contained  in  written  books,  and  in  unwritten 
Traditions  which,  being  received  by  the  Apostles  from 
the  mouth  of  Christ  himself,  or  from  the  same  Apostles 
at  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  being  delivered 
as  it  were  from  hand  to  hand,  have  come  down  to  us, 
following  the  examples  of  the  orthodox  Fathers,  re- 
ceives and  honours  with  an  equal  affectionate  piety 
and  reverence,  all  the  books  as  well  of  the  Old  as  of 
the  New  Testament,  since  the  one  God  is  the  author 
of  both,  and  also  these   Traditions,  as   it  were  orally 

*  Sess.  iv. 

ART.  II.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  143 

dictated  by  Christ  or  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  preserved 
in  the  Catholic  Church  by  perpetual  succession." 
This  is  truly  a  decree  worthy  of  an  assembly  which 
could  say :  It  hath  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
to  us  ;  for  there  is  scarcely  a  word  of  it  which  does 
not  strike  home  against  our  adversaries,  and  which 
does  not  take  their  weapons  from  their  grasp.  For 
what  does  it  henceforth  serve  them  to  exclaim :  In 
vain  do  they  serve  me,  teaching  doctrines  and  com- 
mandments of  men  (Matt.  xv.  9) ;  Yoio  have  made 
void  the  commandment  of  God  for  your  tradition. 
(ibid.  6).  Not  attending  to  Jewish  fables  (Tit.  i.  14); 
Zealous  for  the  traditions  of  my  fathers  (Gal.  i.  14); 
Beware  lest  any  man  impose  upon  you  hy  philosophy 
and  vain  fallacy,  according  to  the  tradition  of  men  (Col. 
ii.  8) ;  Redeemed  from  your  vain  conversation  of  the 
tradition  of  your  fathers  (i  Pet.  i.  18)?  All  this  is 
not  to  the  purpose,  since  the  Council  clearly  protests 
that  the  traditions  it  receives  are  neither  traditions  nor 
commandments  of  men,  but  those  "  which,  being  re- 
ceived by  the  Apostle  from  the  mouth  of  Christ  him- 
self, or  from  the  same  Apostles,  at  the  dictation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  being  delivered  as  it  were  from  hand 
to  hand,  have  come  down  to  us.  They  are  then  the 
word  of  God,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  not 
of  men  ;  and  here  you  will  see  almost  all  your  ministers 
stick,  making  mighty  harangues  to  show  that  human 
tradition  is  not  to  be  put  in  comparison  with  the 
Scriptures.  But  of  what  use  is  all  this  save  to  beguile 
the  poor  hearers  ? — for  we  never  said  it  was. 

In   a  similar  way  they  bring  against  us  what  S. 
Paul  said  to  his  good  Timothy:  *  All  Scripture  divinely 
*  2  Tim.  iii.  i6,  17. 

144  The  Catholic  Controversy s  [parth. 

inspired  is  profitahle  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to  correct,  to 
instruct  in  justice,  that  the  man  of  God  may  he  perfect, 
furnished  unto  every  good  work.  Whom  are  they  angry 
with  ?  This  is  to  force  a  quarrel.*  Who  denies  the 
most  excellent  profitableness  of  the  Scriptures,  except 
the  Huguenots  who  take  away  as  good  for  nothing 
some  of  its  finest  pieces  ?  The  Scriptures  are  indeed 
most  useful,  and  it  is  no  little  favour  which  God  has 
done  us  to  preserve  them  for  us  through  so  many 
persecutions  ;  but  the  utility  of  Scripture  does  not 
make  holy  Traditions  useless,  any  more  than  the  use 
of  one  eye,  of  one  leg,  of  one  ear,  of  one  hand,  makes 
the  other  useless.  The  Council  says :  it  "  receives 
and  honours  with  an  equal  affectionate  piety  and 
reverence  all  the  books  as  well  of  the  Old  as  of  the 
New  Testament,  and  also  these  Traditions."  It  would 
be  a  fine  way  of  reasoning — faith  profits,  therefore 
works  are  good  for  nothing !  Similarly, — Many  other 
things  also  did  Jesus,  which  are  not  written  in  this 
hook.  But  these  are  written  that  you  may  helieve  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  helieving  you  may 
have  life  in  his  name  (John  xx.  30,  31):  therefore 
there  is  nothing  to  believe  except  this ! — excellent 
consequence  !  We  well  know  that  whatever  is  written 
is  written  for  our  edification  (Eom.  xv.  4),  but  shall 
this  hinder  the  Apostles  from  preaching  ?  These  things 
are  written  that  you  may  helieve  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of 
God :  but  that  is  not  enough ;  for  how  shall  they  helieve 
without  a  preacher  (ibid.  x.  14)?  The  Scriptures  are 
given  for  our  salvation,  but  not  the  Scriptures  alone ; 
Traditions  also  have  their  place.  Birds  have  a  right 
wing  to  fly  with  ;  is  the  left  wing  therefore  of  no  use  ? 
•  Querdle  d'Allemand, 

ART.  II.  0. 1,]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  1 45 

The  one  does  not  move  without  the  other.  I  leave  on 
one  side  the  exact  answers :  for  S.  John  is  speaking 
only  of  the  miracles  which  he  had  to  record,  of  which 
he  considers  he  has  given  enough  to  prove  the  divinity 
of  the  Son  of  God. 

When  they  adduce  these  words : —  You  shall  not  add 
to  the  word  that  I  sijcah  to  you,  neither  shall  you  take 
away  from  it  (Deut.  iv.  2) ;  But  though  ive  or  an  angel 
from  heaven  preach  a  gospel  to  you  beside  that  which  ice 
have  preached  to  yoity  let  him  he  anathema  (Gal.  i.  8) : 
they  say  nothing  against  the  Council,  which  expressly 
declares  that  this  Gospel  teaching  consists  not  only  in 
the  Scriptures,  but  also  in  Traditions;  the  Scripture 
then  is  the  Gospel,  but  it  is  not  the  whole  Gospel,  for 
Traditions  form  the  other  part.  He  then  who  shall 
teach  against  what  the  Apostles  have  taught,  let  him 
be  accursed ;  but  the  Apostles  have  taught  by  writing 
and  by  Tradition,  and  the  whole  is  the  Gospel. 

And  if  you  closely  consider  how  the  Council  com- 
pares Traditions  with  the  Scriptures  you  will  see  that 
it  does  not  receive  a  Tradition  contrary  to  Scripture : 
for  it  receives  Tradition  and  Scripture  with  equal 
honour,  because  both  the  one  and  the  other  are  most 
sweet  and  pure  streams,  which  spring  from  one  same 
mouth  of  our  Lord,  as  from  a  living  fountain  of  wis- 
dom, and  therefore  cannot  be  contrary,  but  are  of  the 
same  taste  and  quality ;  and  uniting  together  happily 
water  this  tree  of  Christianity  which  shall  give  its 
fruit  in  due  season. 

We    call    then    Apostolic    Tradition    the   doctrine, 

whether  it  regard  faith  or  morals,  which  our  Lord  has 

taught  with  his  own  mouth  or  by  the  mouth  of  the 

Apostles,  which  without  having  been   written  in  the 

I".  K 

146  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parth 

Canonical  books  has  been  preserved  till  our  time, 
passing  from  hand  to  hand  by  continual  succession  of 
the  Church.  In  a  word,  it  is  the  Word  of  the  living 
God,  witnessed  not  on  paper  but  on  the  heart.'"  And 
there  is  not  merely  Tradition  of  ceremonies  and  of  a 
certain  exterior  order  which  is  arbitrary  and  of  mere 
propriety,  but  as  the  holy  Council  says,  of  doctrine, 
which  belongs  to  faith  itself  and  to  morals; — though 
as  regards  Traditions  of  morals  there  are  some  which 
lay  us  under  a  most  strict  obligation,  and  others  which 
are  only  proposed  to  us  by  way  of  counsel  and 
becomingness ;  and  the  non-observance  of  these  latter 
does  not  make  us  guilty,  provided  that  they  are 
approved  and  esteemed  as  holy,  and  are  not  despised. 




We  confess  that  the  Holy  Scripture  is  a  most  excellent 
and  profitable  doctrine.  It  is  written  in  order  that 
we  may  believe ;  everything  that  is  contrary  to  it  is 
falsehood  and  impiety :  but  to  establish  these  truths 
it  is  not  necessary  to  reject  this  which  is  also  a  truth, 
that  Traditions  are  most  profitable,  given  in  order  that 
we  may  believe ;  everything  that  is  contrary  to  them 
is  impiety  and  falsehood.      For  to  establish  one  truth 

*  The  learned  Antony  Possevin,  contra  Chytrceum,  remarks  that  the 
Christian  doctrine  is  not  called  Eugraphium  [good  writings],  but 
Evangelium  [good  tidings]. 

AKT.  IT.  c.  II.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  147 

we  are  never  to  destroy  another.  The  Scripture  is 
useful  to  teach ;  learn  then  from  the  Scripture  itself 
that  we  must  receive  with  honour  and  faith  holy 
Traditions.  If  we  are  to  add  nothing  to  what  our 
Lord  has  commanded, — where  has  he  commanded  that 
we  should  condemn  Apostolic  Traditions  ?  Why  do 
you  add  this  to  his  words  ?  Where  has  our  Lord 
ever  taught  it  ?  Indeed  so  far  is  he  from  having  ever 
commanded  the  contempt  of  Apostolic  Traditions  that 
he  never  despised  any  Tradition  of  the  least  Prophet 
in  the  world.  Eun  through  all  the  Gospel,  and  you 
will  see  nothing  censured  there  except  Traditions 
which  are  human  and  contrary  to  the  Scripture.  But 
if  neither  our  Lord  has  written  it  nor  his  Apostles, 
why  would  you  evangelise  unto  us  these  things  ?  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  forbidden  to  take  anything  away 
from  the  Scripture ;  why  then  would  you  take  away  the 
Traditions  which  are  so  expressly  authorised  therein  ? 

Is  it  not  the  Holy  Scripture  of  S.  Paul  which  says : 
Therefore,  hrethren,  hold  fast  the  Traditions  which  you 
have  received,  whether  hy  word  or  hy  our  epistle "  ? 
(2  Thess.  ii.  14).  "Hence  it  is  evident  that  the 
Apostles  did  not  deliver  everything  by  Epistle,  but 
many  things  also  without  letters.  They  are,  how- 
ever, wortliy  of  the  same  faith,  these  as  much  as 
those,"  are  the  words  of  S. '  Chrysostom  in  his  com- 
mentary on  this  place. 

This  S.  John  likewise  confirms  :  Having  more  things 
to  write  to  you,  I  would  not  by  paper  and  ink :  for  I 
hope  that  I  shall  be  with  you  and  speak  face  to  face 
(Epp.  2,  3).  They  were  things  worthy  of  being 
written,  yet  he  has  not  done  it,  but  has  said  them, 
and  instead  of  Scripture  has  made  Tradition. 

148  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parth. 

Hold  the,  form  of  sound  words,  which  thou  hast 
heard  from  me  .  .  .  KeeiJ  the  good  deposited^  said  S. 
Pa[ul  to  his  Timothy  (2  Ep.  i.  14).  Was  not  this 
recommending  to  him  the  unwritten  Apostolic  word  ? 
and  that  is  Tradition.  And  lower  down  :  And  the 
things  which  thou  hast  heard  from  me  heforc  many 
witnesses,  the  same  commend  to  faithful  men,  who  shall 
he  fit  to  teach  others  also  (ii.  2).  What  is  there  more 
clear  for  Tradition  ?  Behold  the  method  ;  the  Apostle 
speaks,  the  witnesses  relate,  S.  Timothy  is  to  teach  it 
to  others,  and  these  to  others  yet.  Do  we  not  see 
here  a  holy  substitution  and  spiritual  trusteeship  ? 

Does  not  the  same  Apostle  praise  the  Corinthians 
for  the  observances  of  Tradition  ?  If  this  were  written 
in  the  2nd  of  Corinthians,  one  might  say  that  by  his 
ordinances  he  understands  those  of  the  ist,  though 
the  sense  of  the  passage  would  be  forced  (but  to  him 
who  does  not  want  to  move  every  shadow  is  an  ex- 
cuse);  but  this  is  written  in  the  ist  (xi.  2).  He 
speaks  not  of  any  gospel,  for  he  would  not  call  it  my 
ordinances.  What  was  it  then  but  an  unwritten 
Apostolic  doctrine  ? — this  we  call  Tradition.  And 
when  he  says  to  them  at  the  end :  The  rest  I  will  set 
in  order  when  I  come,  he  lets  us  see  that  he  had  taught 
them  many  very  important  things,  and  yet  we  have 
no  writing  about  them  elsewhere.  Will  what  he 
said,  then,  be  lost  to  the  Church  ?  certainly  not ;  but 
it  has  come  down  by  Tradition.  Otherwise  the 
Apostle  would  not  have  deprived  posterity  of  it,  and 
would  have  written  it. 

And  our  Lord  says :  Many  things  I  have  to  say  to 
you,  hut  you  cannot  hear  tJiem  71010  (John  xvi.  12).  I 
ask  you,  when  did  he  say  these  things  which  he  had 

ART.  III.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  FaitJu  \  49 

to  say  ?  Certainly  it  was  either  after  his  Kesurrection, 
during  the  forty  days  he  was  with  them,  or  by  the 
coming  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  what  do  we  know  of 
what  he  comprehended  under  the  word: — /  have 
many  things,  &c. — if  all  is  written  ?  It  is  said  indeed 
that  he  was  forty  days  with  them  teaching  them  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God ;  but  we  have  neither  all  his 
apparitions  nor  what  he  told  them  therein. 




WORD    OF    GOD. 

Once  when  Absalom  *  wished  to  form  a  faction  against 
his  good  father,  he  sat  in  the  way  near  the  gate,  and 
said  to  all  who  went  by :  There  is  no  man  appointed  hy 
the  king  to  hear  thee  ...  0  that  they  woidd  make  me 
jicdge  over  the  land,  that  all  that  have  business  might 
come  to  me,  and  I  might  do  them  justice.  Thus  did  he 
undermine  the  loyalty  of  the  Israelites.  But  how 
many  Absaloms  have  there  been  in  our  age,  who,  to 
seduce  and  distract  the  people  from  obedience  to  the 
Church,  and  to  lead  Christians  into  revolt,  have  cried 

*  2  Kings  XV.     The  Saint  has  used  the  same  illustration,  almost  in 
the  same  words,  in  Part  I.  c.  xii.    [Tr.] 

150  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

up  and  down  the  ways  of  Germany  and  of  France : 
There  is  no  one  appointed  by  the  Lord  to  hear  and 
resolve  differences  concerning  faith  and  religion ;  the 
Church  has  no  power  in  this  matter !  If  you  consider 
well,  Christians,  you  will  see  that  whoever  holds  this 
language  wishes  to  be  judge  himself,  though  he  does 
not  openly  say  so,  more  cunning  than  Absalom.  I 
have  seen  one  of  the  most  recent  books  of  Theodore 
Beza,  entitled  :  Of  the  true,  essential  and  visible  marks 
of  the  true  Catholic  Church  ;  he  seems  to  me  to  aim  at 
making  himself,  with  his  colleagues,  judge  of  all  the 
differences  which  are  between  us ;  he  says  that  the 
conclusion  of  all  his  argument  is  that  ^'  the  true  Christ 
is  the  only  true  and  perpetual  mark  of  the  Catholic 
Church," — understanding  by  true  Christ,  he  says, 
Christ  as  he  has  most  perfectly  declared  himself  from 
the  beginning,  whether  in  the  Prophetic  or  Apostolic 
writings,  in  what  belongs  to  our  salvation.  Further  on 
he  says :  "  This  was  what  I  had  to  say  on  the  true, 
sole,  and  essential  mark  of  the  true  Church,  which  is 
the  written  Word,  Prophetic  and  Apostolic,  well  and 
rightly  ministered."  Higher  up  he  had  admitted  that 
there  were  great  difficulties  in  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
but  not  in  things  which  touch  faith.  In  the  margin 
he  places  this  warning,  which  he  has  put  almost  every- 
where in  the  text :  "  The  interpretation  of  Scripture 
must  not  be  drawn  elsewhere  than  from  the  Scripture 
itself,  by  comparing  passages  one  with  another,  and 
adapting  them  to  the  analogy  of  the  faith."  And  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  King  of  France :  "  We  ask  that  the 
appeal  be  made  to  the  holy  canonical  Scriptures,  and 
that,  if  there  be  any  doubt  as  to  the  interpretation  of 
them,  the  correspundence  and  relation   which  should 

ART.  III.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  1 5 1 

exist  among  these  passages  of  Scripture  and  the  articles 
of  faith,  be  the  judge."  He  there  receives  the  Fathers 
as  of  authority  just  as  far  as  they  should  find  their 
foundation  in  the  Scriptures.  He  continues  :  "  As  to 
the  point  of  doctrine  we  cannot  appeal  to  any  irre- 
proachable judge  save  the  Lord  himself,  who  has 
declared  all  his  counsel  concerning  our  salvation  by 
the  Apostles  and  the  Prophets."  He  says  again  that 
"  his  party  are  not  such  as  would  disavow  a  single 
Council  worthy  of  the  name,  general  or  particular, 
ancient  or  later,  (take  note)—"  provided,"  says  he, 
"  that  the  touchstone,  which  is  the  word  of  God,  be 
used  to  try  it."  That,  in  one  word,  is  what  all  these 
reformers  want — to  take  Scripture  as  judge.  And  to 
this  we  answer  Amen  :  but  we  say  that  our  difference 
is  not  there ;  it  is  here,  that  in  the  disagreements  we 
shall  have  over  the  interpretation,  and  which  will 
occur  at  every  two  words,  we  shall  need  a  judge. 
They  answer  that  we  must  decide  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture  by  collating  passage  with  passage  and  the 
whole  with  the  Symbol  of  faith.  Amen,  Amen,  we 
say :  but  we  do  not  ask  how  we  ought  to  interpret  the 
Scripture,  but — who  shall  be  the  judge  ?  For  after 
having  compared  passages  with  passages,  and  the  whole 
with  the  Symbol  of  the  faith,  we  find  by  this  passage : 
Thoic  art  Peter,  and  u]Jon  this  rock  I  will  huild  my 
C%urch,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it, 
and  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
(Matt,  xvi.),  that  S.  Peter  has  been  chief  minister  and 
supreme  steward  in  the  Church  of  God  :  you  say,  on 
your  side  that  this  passage :  The  kings  of  the  nations 
lord  it  over  them  .  .  .  hut  you  not  so  (Luke  xxii.),  or 
this  other  (for  they  are  all  so  weak  that  I  know  not 

152  The  CatJiolic  Controversy.  [PARni. 

what  may  be  your  main  authority) :  No  one  can  lay 
another  foundation^  &c.  (i  Cor.  iii.  1 1),  compared  with 
the  other  passages  and  the  analogy  of  the  faith  makes 
you  detest  a  chief  minister.  The  two  of  us  follow 
one  same  way  in  our  enquiry  concerning  the  truth  in 
this  question — namely,  whether  there  is  in  the  Church 
a  Vicar  General  of  Our  Lord — and  yet  I  have  arrived 
at  the  affirmative,  and  you,  you  have  ended  in  the 
negative;  who  now  shall  judge  of  our  difference? 
Here  lies  the  essential  point  as  between  you  and  me. 

I  quite  admit,  be  it  said  in  passing,  that  he  who 
shall  enquire  of  Theodore  Beza  will  say  that  you  have 
reasoned  better  than  I,  but  on  what  does  he  rely  for 
this  judgment  except  on  what  seems  good  to  himself, 
according  to  the  pre-judgment  he  has  formed  of  the 
matter  long  ago  ? — and  he  may  say  what  he  likes,  for 
who  has  made  him  judge  between  you  and  me  ? 

Recognise,  Christians,  the  spirit  of  division :  your 
people  send  you  to  the  Scriptures  ; — we  are  there  be- 
fore you  came  into  the  world,  and  what  we  believe,  we 
find  there  clear  and  plain.  But, — it  must  be  properly 
understood,  adapting  passage  to  passage,  the  whole 
to  the  Creed ; — we  are  at  this  now  fifteen  hundred 
years  and  more.  You  are  mistaken,  answers  Luther. 
Who  told  you  so  ?  Scripture.  What  Scripture  ? 
Such  and  such,  collated  so,  and  fitted  to  the  Creed, 
On  the  contrary,  say  I,  it  is  you,  Luther,  who  are  mis- 
taken :  the  Scripture  tells  me  so,  in  such  and  such  a 
passage,  nicely  joined  and  adjusted  to  such  and  such 
a  Scripture,  and  to  the  articles  of  the  faith.  I  am  not 
in  doubt,  as  to  whether  we  must  give  belief  to  the 
holy  Word  ; — who  knows  not  that  it  is  in  the  supreme 
degree  of  certitude  ?     What  exercises  me  is  the  under- 

ART.  III.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  153 

standing  of  this  Scripture — the  consequences  and  con- 
clusions drawn  from  it,  which  being  different  beyond 
number  and  very  often  contradictory  on  the  same 
point,  so  that  each  one  chooses  his  own,  one  here  the 
other  there — who  shall  make  me  see  truth  through  so 
many  vanities  ?  Who  shall  give  me  to  see  this  Scrip- 
ture in  its  native  colour  ?  For  the  neck  of  this  dove 
changes  its  appearance  as  often  as  those  who  look 
upon  it  change  position  and  distance.  The  Scripture 
is  a  most  holy  and  infallible  touchstone ;  every  pro- 
position, which  stands  this  test"^  I  accept  as  most 
faithful  and  sound.  But  what  am  I  to  do,  when  I 
have  in  my  hands  this  proposition :  the  natural  body 
of  our  Lord  is  really,  substantially  and  actually  in  the 
Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Altar.  I  have  it  touched  at 
every  angle  and  on  every  side,  by  the  express  and 
purest  word  of  God,  and  by  the  Apostles'  Creed. 
There  is  no  place  when  I  do  not  rub  it  a  hundred 
times,  if  you  like.  And  the  more  I  examine  it  the 
finer  gold  and  purer  metal  do  I  recognise  it  to  be 
made  of.  You  say  that  having  done  the  same  you 
find  base  metal  in  it.  What  do  you  want  me  to  do  ? 
All  these  masters  have  handled  it  already,  and  all 
have  come  to  the  same  decision  as  I,  and  with  such 
assurance,  that  in  general  assemblies  of  the  craft,  they 
have  turned  out  all  who  said  differently.  Good  heavens  ! 
who  shall  resolve  our  doubts  ?  We  must  not  speak 
again  of  the  touchstone  or  it  will  be  said :  The  wicked 
walk  round  about  (in  circuitu)  (Ps.  xi.  9).  We  must 
have  some  one  to  take  it  up,  and  to  test  the  piece 
himself;  then  he  must  give  judgment,  and  we  must 
submit,  both  of  us,  and  argue  no  more.     Otherwise 

*  See  Prelace. 

154  1^^^^  Catholic  Controversy.  [pakth. 

each  one  will  believe  what  he  likes.  Let  us  take  care 
lest  with  regard  to  these  words  we  be  drawincr  the 
Scripture  after  our  notions,  instead  of  following  it.  If 
the  salt  hath  lost  its  savour,  with  what  shall  it  he  salted 
(Matt.  V.  1 3)  ?  If  the  Scripture  be  the  subject  of  our 
disagreement,  who  shall  decide  ? 

Ah !  whoever  says  that  Our  Lord  has  placed  us  in 
the  bark  of  his  Church,  at  the  mercy  of  the  winds 
and  of  the  tide,  instead  of  giving  us  a  skilful  pilot 
perfectly  at  home,  by  nautical  art,  with  chart  and  com- 
pass, such  a  one  says  that  he  wishes  our  destruction. 
Let  him  have  placed  therein  the  most  excellent  com- 
pass and  the  most  correct  chart  in  the  world,  what 
use  are  these  if  no  one  knows  how  to  oain  from  them 
some  infallible  rule  for  directing  the  ship  ?  Of  what 
use  is  the  best  of  rudders  if  there  is  no  steersman  to 
move  it  as  the  ship's  course  requires  ?  But  if  every 
one  is  allowed  to  turn  it  in  the  direction  he  thinks 
good,  who  sees  not  that  we  are  lost  ? 

It  is  not  the  Scripture  which  requires  a  foreign 
light  or  rule,  as  Beza  thinks  we  believe  ;  it  is  our 
glosseS;  our  conclusions,  understandings,  interpreta- 
tions, conjectures,  additions,  and  other  such  workings 
of  man's  brain,  which,  being  unal)le  to  be  quiet,  is 
ever  busied  about  new  inventions.  Certainly  we  do 
not  want  a  judge  to  decide  between  us  and  God,  as 
he  seems  to  infer  in  his  Letter.  It  is  between  a  man 
such  as  Calvin,  Luther,  Beza,  and  another  such  as 
Eckius,  Fisher,  More ;  for  we  do  not  ask  whether 
God  understands  the  Scripture  better  than  we  do,  but 
whether  Calvin  understands  it  better  than  S.  Augus- 
tine  or   S.  Cyprian.      S.   Hilary   says   excellently  :  * 

*  Lib.  2.  de  Trin. 

ART.  III.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  155 

"  Heresy  is  in  the  uiicleistandiiiLr,  not  in  the  Scripture, 
and  the  fault  is  in  the  meaning,  not  in  the  words." 
and  S.  Augustine  :  *  "  Heresies  arise  simply  from  this, 
that  good  Scriptures  are  ill-understood,  and  what  is 
ill-understood  in  them  is  also  rashly  and  presumptu- 
ously given  forth."  It  is  a  true  Michol's  game;  it 
is  to  cover  a  statue,  made  expressly,  with  the  clothes 
of  David  (i  Kings  xix.)  He  who  looks  at  it  thinks 
he  has  seen  David,  but  he  is  deceived,  David  is 
not  there.  Heresy  covers  up,  in  the  bed  of  its 
brain,  the  statue  of  its  own  opinion  in  the  clothes 
of  Holy  Scripture.  He  who  sees  this  doctrine 
thinks  he  has  seen  the  Holy  Word  of  God,  but 
he  is  mistaken ;  it  is  not  there.  The  words  are 
there,  but  not  the  meaning.  "  The  Scriptures,"  says  S. 
Jerome,  t  "  consist  not  in  the  reading  but  in  the  under- 
standing : "  that  is,  faith  is  not  in  the  knowing  the 
words  but  the  sense.  And  it  is  here  that  I  think 
I  have  thoroughly  proved  that  we  have  need  of 
another  rule  for  our  faith,  besides  the  rule  of  Holy 
Scripture.  "  If  the  world  last  long  (said  Luther  once 
by  good  hap  J)  it  will  be  again  necessary,  on  account 
of  the  different  interpretations  of  Scripture  which  now 
exist,  that  to  preserve  the  unity  of  the  faith  we  should 
receive  the  Councils  and  decrees  and  fly  to  them  for 
refuge."  He  acknowledges  that  formerly  they  were 
received,  and  that  afterwards  they  will  have  to  be. 

I  have  dwelt  on  this  at  length,  but  when  it  is  well 
understood,  we  have  no  small  means  of  determining 
a  most  holy  deliberation. 

I  say  as  much  of  Traditions ;  for  if  each  one  will 

*  In  Joan.  Tr.  xviii,  i.  f  Adv.  Lucif.  28. 

+  Contr.  Zuing.  et  (Ecul, 

156  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

bring  forward  Traditions,  and  we  have  no  judge  on 
earth  to  make  in  the  last  resort  the  difference  between 
those  which  are  to  be  received  and  those  which  are 
not,  where,  I  pray  you,  shall  we  be  ?  We  have  clear 
examples.  Calvin  finds  tliat  the  Apocalypse  is  to  be 
received,  Luther  denies  it ;  the  same  with  the  Epistle 
of  S.  James.  Who  shall  reform  these  opinions  of  the 
reformers  ?  Either  the  one  or  the  other  is  ill  formed, 
who  shall  put  it  right  ?  Here  is  a  second  necessity 
which  we  have  of  another  rule  besides  the  Word  of 

There  is,  however,  a  very  great  difference  between 
the  first  rules  and  this  one.  For  the  first  rule,  which 
is  the  Word  of  God,  is  a  rule  infallible  in  itself,  and 
most  sufficient  to  regulate  all  the  understandings  in 
the  world.  The  second  is  not  properly  a  rule  of 
itself,  but  only  in  so  far  as  it  applies  the  first  and 
proposes  to  us  the  right  doctrine  contained  in  the 
Holy  Word.  In  the  same  way  the  laws  are  said  to  be 
a  rule  in  civil  causes.  The  judge  is  not  so  of  himself, 
since  his  judging  is  conditioned  by  the  ruling  of  the 
law  ;  yet  he  is,  and  may  well  be  called,  a  rule,  because 
the  application  of  the  laws  being  subject  to  variety, 
when  he  has  once  made  it  we  must  conform  to  it. 

The  Holy  Word  then  is  the  first  law  of  our  faith; 
there  remains  the  application  of  this  rule,  which  being 
able  to  receive  as  many  forms  as  there  are  brains  in 
the  world,  in  spite  of  all  the  analogies  of  the  faith, 
there  is  need  further  of  a  second  rule  to  regulate  this 
application.  There  must  be  doctrine  and  there  must 
be  some  one  to  propose  it.  The  doctrine  is  in  the 
Holy  Word,  but  who  shall  propose  it  ?  The  way  in 
which  one  deduces  an   article   of   faith   is  this :   the 

ART,  m.  0.  n.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  157 

Word  of  God  is  infallible ;  the  Word  of  God  declares 
that  Baptism  is  necessary  for  salvation;  therefore 
Baptism  is  necessary  for  salvation.  The  ist  Proposi- 
tion cannot  be  gainsayed,  v^^e  are  at  variance  with 
Calvin  about  the  2nd ; — vi^ho  shall  reconcile  ns  ? 
Who  shall  resolve  our  doubt  ?  If  he  who  has 
authority  to  propose  can  err  in  his  proposition  all  has 
to  be  done  over  again.  There  must  therefore  be  some 
infallible  authority  in  whose  propounding  we  are 
obliged  to  acquiesce.  The  Word  of  God  cannot  err, 
He  who  proposes  it  cannot  err;  thus  shall  all  be 
perfectly  assured. 



Now  is  it  not  reasonable  that  no  private  individual 
should  attribute  to  himself  this  infallible  judgment  on 
the  interpretation  or  explanation  of  the  Holy  Word  ? 
— otherwise,  where  should  we  be  ?  Who  would  be 
willing  to  submit  to  the  yoke  of  a  private  individual  ? 
Why  of  one  rather  than  of  another  ?  Let  him  talk  as 
much  as  he  will  of  analogy,  of  enthusiasm,  of  the 
Lord,  of  the  Spirit, — all  this  shall  never  so  bind  my 
understanding  as  that,  if  I  must  sail  at  hazard,  I  will 
not  jump  into  the  vessel  of  my  own  judgment,  rather 
than  that  of  another,  let  him  talk  Greek,  Hebrew, 
Latin,  Tartar,  Moorish,  and  whatever  you  like.  If  we 
are  to  run  the  risk  of  erring,  who  would  not  choose  to 

1 58  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

run  it  rather  by  following  his  own  fancy,  than  by 
slavishly  following  that  of  Calvin  or  Luther  ?  Every- 
body shall  give  liberty  to  his  wits  to  run  promiscuously 
about  amongst  opinions  the  most  diverse  possible ;  and, 
indeed,  he  will  perhaps  light  on  truth  as  soon  as  another 
will.  But  it  is  impious  to  believe  that  Our  Lord  has 
not  left  us  some  supreme  judge  on  earth  to  whom  we 
can  address  ourselves  in  our  difficulties,  and  who  is  so 
infallible  in  his  judgments  that  we  cannot  err. 

I  maintain  that  this  judge  is  no  other  than  the 
Church  Catholic,  which  can  in  no  way  err  in  the  inter- 
pretations and  conclusions  she  makes  with  regard  to 
the  Holy  Scripture,  nor  in  the  decisions  she  gives 
concerning  the  difficulties  which  are  found  therein. 
For  who  has  ever  heard  this  doubted  of  ? 

All  that  our  adversaries  can  say  is  that  this  infalli- 
bility is  only  true  of  the  invisible  Church.^  But  they 
arrive  at  this  their  opinion  of  the  invisibility  of  the 
Church  by  two  roads;  for  some  say  it  is  invisible 
because  it  consists  only  of  persons  elect  and  predesti- 
nate :  the  others  attribute  this  invisibility  to  the  rareness 
and  scattering  of  the  believers  and  faithful.  Of  these 
the  first  consider  the  Church  to  be  invisible  at  all 
times,  the  others  say  that  this  invisibility  has  lasted 
about  a  thousand  years,  more  or  less ;  that  is,  from  S. 
Gregory  to  Luther,  during  which  time  the  papal 
authority  was  peaceably  established  among  Christians  : 
for  they  say  that  during  this  time  there  were  some 
true  Christians  in  secret,  who  did  not  manifest  their 
intentions,  and  were  satisfied  with  thus  serving  God  in 
concealment.  This  theology  is  imagination  and  guess- 
work ;  so  that  others  have  preferred  to  say,  that  during 

*  See  Preface. 

ART.  III.  c.  II.]  The  Rtde  of  Faith.  .     159 

those  thousand  years  the  Church  was  neither  visible 
nor  invisible,  but  altogether  effaced  and  suffocated  by 
impiety  and  idolatry.  Permit  me,  I  beseech  you,  to 
say  the  truth  freely ;  all  these  words  are  the  incoher- 
encies  of  fever,  they  are  but  dreams  had  while  awake, 
and  not  worth  the  dream  Nabuchodonosor  had  while 
asleep.  And  they  are  entirely  contrary  to  it  if  we 
believe  Daniel's  interpretation ;  *  for  ISTabuchodonosor 
saw  a  stone  cut  out  of  a  mountain  without  hands,  which 
went  rolling  till  it  overthrew  the  great  statue,  and  so 
increased  that  having  become  a  mountain  it  filled  the 
whole  earth :  this  Daniel  understood  of  the  Kincf- 
dom  of  Our  Lord,  which  shall  last  for  ever.  If  it  be 
as  a  mountain,  and  a  mountain  so  large  as  to  fill  the 
whole  earth,  how  shall  it  be  invisible  or  secret  ?  And 
if  it  last  for  ever,  how  shall  it  have  failed  a  thousand 
years  ?  And  it  is  certainly  of  the  Kingdom  of  the 
Church  militant  that  this  passage  is  to  be  understood ; 
for  that  of  the  triumphant  will  fill  heaven,  not  earth 
only,  and  will  not  arise  during  the  time  of  the  other 
Kingdoms,  as  Daniel's  interpretation  says,  but  after 
the  consummation  of  the  world.  Add  to  this  that  to 
be  cut  from  the  mountain  without  hands,  belongs  to 
the  temporal  generation  of  Our  Lord,  according  to 
which  he  has  been  conceived  in  the  womb  of  the 
Virgin,  and  engendered  of  her  own  substance  without 
work  of  man,  by  the  sole  benediction  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Either  then  Daniel  has  badly  prophesied,  or 
the  adversaries  of  the  Catholic  Church  have  done  so 
when  they  have  said  the  Church  was  invisible,  hidden 
and  destroyed.  In  God's  name  have  patience ;  we 
will  go  in  order  and  briefly,  while  showing  the  vanity 

*  Daniel  ii 

i6o  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [partil 

of  those  opinions.     But  we  must,  before   all  things, 
say  what  the  Church  is. 

Church  comes  from  the  Greek  word  meaning  to  call. 
Church  then  signifies  an  assembly,  or  company  of 
persons  called.  Synagogue  means  a  flock,  to  speak 
properly.  The  assembly  of  the  Jews  was  called 
Synagogue,  that  of  Christians  is  called  Church  :  be- 
cause the  Jews  were  as  a  flock  of  animals,  assembled 
and  herded  by  fear ;  Christians  are  brought  together 
by  the  Word  of  God,  called  together  in  the  union  of 
charity,  by  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles  and  their 
successors.  "Wherefore  S.  Augustine  has  said"^^  that 
the  Church  is  named  from  convocation,  the  synagogue 
from  flock,  because  to  be  convoked  belongs  more  to 
men,  to  be  driven  together  refers  rather  to  cattle. 
Now  it  is  with  good  reason  that  we  call  the  Christian 
people  the  Church,  or  convocation,  because  the  first 
benefit  God  does  to  a  man  whom  he  is  about  to  receive 
into  grace  is  to  call  him  to  the  Church.  Those  xoliom 
lie  'predestinated  them  lie  also  called,  said  S.  Paul  to  the 
Eomans  (viii.  30); — that  is  the  first  effect  of  his  pre- 
destination : — and  to  the  Colossians  (iii.  15):  Let  the 
peace  of  Christ  rejoice  in  your  hearts,  wherein  also  you 
are  called  in  one  body.  To  be  called  in  one  body  is  to 
be  called  in  the  Church,  and  in  those  comparisons 
which  Our  Lord  makes,  in  S.  Matthew  (xx.  xxii.),  of 
the  vineyard  and  the  banquet  to  the  Church,  the 
workmen  in  the  vineyard  and  the  guests  at  the 
banquet,  he  names  the  called  and  invited  ones :  Many, 
says  he,  are  called,  hut  few  are  chosen.  The  Athenians 
called  the  assemblage  of  the  citizens  the  church,  an 
assemblage  of  strangers  was  called  by  another  name— 

*  In  Ps.  Ixxxi. 

ART.  III.  0.  III.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  1 6 1 

AiaKkr\(jL^.  Whence  the  word  Church  belongs  pro- 
perly to  Christians,  who  are  no  more  strangers  and 
foreigners,  hut  fellow-citizens  of  the  saints  and  domestics 
of  God  (Eph.  ii.  19).  You  see  whence  is  taken  the 
word  Church,  and  here  is  its  definition  :  *  The  Church 
is  a  holy  university  or  general  company  of  men  united 
and  collected  together  in  the  profession  of  one  same 
Christian  faith ;  in  the  participation  of  the  same 
Sacraments  and  Sacrifice ;  and  in  obedience  to  one 
same  Vicar  and  Lieutenant-general  on  earth  of  Our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  successor  of  S.  Peter;  under 
the  charge  of  lawful  Bishops. 

^^^  ^^osf  ^^ 



I  will  not  dwell  long  on  this  point.  You  know  that 
all  we  Catholics  acknowledge  the  Pope  as  Vicar  of 
Our  Lord.  The  universal  Church  acknowledged  him 
lately  at  Trent,  when  she  addressed  herself  to  him  for 
confirmation  of  what  she  had  resolved,  and  when  she 
received  his  deputies  as  the  ordinary  and  legitimate 
presiding  body  of  the  Council.  I  should  lose  time 
also  [to  prove  that]  you  have  no  visible  head;  you 
admit  it.  You  have  a  supreme  Consistory,  like  those 
of  Berne,  Geneva,  Zurich   and  the  rest,  which  depend 

*  From  Ephes.   v.   27  ;   John  xi.   52  ;    S.  Cyprian   de  unit  Eccl.  ; 
Ephes.  iv.  4  ;  Matt.  xvi.  ;  Heb.  vii.  11 ;  Ephes.  iv.  11,  12. 

1 62  The  Catholic  Conlroversy,  [parth. 

on  no  other.  You  are  so  far  from  consenting  to 
recognise  a  universal  head,  that  you  have  not  even  a 
provincial  head.  Your  ministers  are  one  as  good  as 
another,  and  have  no  prerogative  in  the  Consistory, 
yea,  are  inferior  in  knowledge  and  in  vote  to  the  presi- 
dent who  is  no  minister.  As  for  your  bishops  or 
superintendents,  you  are  not  satisfied  with  lowering 
them  to  the  rank  of  ministers,  but  have  made  them 
inferior,  so  as  to  leave  nothing  in  its  proper  place. 

The  English  hold  their  queen  as  head  of  their 
church,  contrary  to  the  pure  Word  of  God.  Not  that 
they  are  mad  enough,  so  far  as  I  know,  to  consider  her 
head  of  the  Catholic  Church,  but  only  of  those  un- 
happy countries. 

In  short,  there  is  no  one  head  over  all  others  in 
spiritual  things,  either  amongst  you  or  amongst  the  rest 
of  those  who  make  profession  of  opposing  the  Pope. 

How  many  times  and  in  how  many  places  is  the 
Church,  as  well  militant  as  triumphant,  both  in  Old 
and  New  Testament,  called  house  and  family !  It 
would  seem  to  me  lost  time  to  search  this  out,  since  it 
is  so  common  in  the  Scriptures  that  he  who  has  read 
them  will  never  question  it,  and  he  who  has  not  read 
them  will  find,  as  soon  as  he  reads  them,  this  form  of 
speech  in  a  manner  everywhere.  It  is  of  the  Church 
that  S.  Paul  says  to  his  dear  Timothy  (i  iii.  15). 
That  tliou  mayest  know  how  thou  oughtest  to  hehave 
thyself  in  the  house  of  God,  which  is  the  Church,  .  . 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth.  It  is  of  her  that 
David  says :  Blessed  are  they  who  dwell  in  thy  house, 
0  Lord  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  5).  It  is  of  her  that  the  angel 
said:  He  shall  reign  in  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever 
(Luke  i.   3  2).     It  is  of  her  that  Our  Lord  said :  In 

ART.  III.  c.  III.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  163 

my  Fathers  house  there  are  many  ma7isions  (John  xiv. 
2).  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  to  a  master  of  a 
family,  in  Matthew,  chapter  20,  and  in  a  hundred 
thousand  other  places. 

JSTow  the  Church  being  a  house  and  a  family,  the 
Master  thereof  can  doubtless  be  but  one,  Jesus  Christ: 
and  so  is  it  called  house  of  God.  But  this  Master 
and  householder  ascending  to  the  right  hand  of  God, 
having  left  many  servants  in  his  house,  would  leave 
one  of  them  who  should  be  servant-in-chief,  and  to 
whom  the  others  should  be  responsible ;  wherefore 
Christ  said  :  Who  (thinkest  thou)  is  a  faithful  and  wise 
servant,  whom  his  lord  hath  set  over  his  family  (Matt, 
xxiv.  45).  In  truth,  if  there  were  not  a  foreman  in  a 
shop,  think  how  the  business  would  be  done — or  if 
there  were  not  a  king  in  a  kingdom,  a  captain  in  a 
ship,  a  father  in  a  family — in  fact  it  would  no  longer 
be  a  family.  But  hear  Our  Lord  in  S.  Matthew  (xii.) : 
Every  city  or  house  divided  against  itself  shall  not 
stand.  Never  can  a  province  be  well  governed  by 
itself,  above  all  if  it  be  large.  I  ask  you,  gentlemen 
so  wise,  who  will  have  no  head  in  the  Church,  can  you 
give  me  an  example  of  any  government  of  importance 
in  which  all  the  particular  governments  are  not  re- 
duced to  one  ?  We  may  pass  over  the  Macedonians, 
Babylonians,  Jews,  Medes,  Persians,  Arabians,  Syrians, 
French,  Spaniards,  English,  and  a  vast  number  of 
eminent  states,  in  regard  to  which  the  matter  is 
evident ;  but  let  us  come  to  republics.  Tell  me, 
where  have  you  ever  seen  any  great  province  which 
has  governed  itself  ?  Nowhere.  The  chief  part  of  the 
world  was  at  one  time  in  the  Eoman  Eepublic,  but  a 
single   Eome    governed;    a    single  Athens,   Carthage, 

164  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [paeth. 

and  so  of  the  other  ancient  republics ;  a  single  Venice, 
a  single  Genoa,  a  single  Lucerne,  Fribourg  and  the 
rest.  You  will  never  find  that  the  single  parts  of 
some  notable  and  great  province  have  set  to  work  to 
govern  themselves.  But  it  was,  is,  and  will  be  neces- 
sary that  one  man  alone,  or  one  single  body  of  men 
residing  in  one  place,  or  one  single  town,  or  some 
small  portion  of  a  province,  has  governed  the  province 
if  the  rest  of  the  province  were  large.  You,  gentlemen, 
who  delight  in  history,  I  am  assured  of  your  suffrages; 
you  will  not  let  me  be  contradicted.  But  supposing 
(which  is  most  false)  that  some  particular  province 
was  self-governed,  how  can  this  be  said  of  the  Christian 
Church,  which  is  so  universal  that  it  comprehends  all 
the  world  ?  How  could  it  be  one  if  it  governed  itself? 
And  if  not,  there  would  be  need  to  have  a  council  of 
all  the  bishoprics  always  standing — and  who  would 
convoke  it  ?  It  would  be  necessary  for  all  the  bishops 
to  be  absent ; — and  how  could  that  be  ?  And  if  all 
the  bishops  were  equal,  who  would  call  them  to- 
gether ?  And  how  great  a  difficulty  would  it  be,  if 
there  were  some  doubt  in  a  matter  of  faith,  to 
assemble  a  council !  It  cannot  then  possibly  be  that 
the  whole  Church  and  each  part  thereof  should  govern 
itself,  without  dependence  of  one  part  on  the  other. 

Now,  since  I  have  sufficiently  proved  that  one  part 
should  depend  on  another,  I  ask  which  part  it  is  on 
which  the  dependence  should  be,  whether  a  province, 
or  a  city,  or  an  assembly,  or  a  single  person  ?  If  a 
province,  where  is  it  ?  It  is  not  England,  for  when 
it  was  Catholic  [it  did  not  claim  this  right].  Where 
is  it  ?  and  why  this  one  rather  than  that  ?  Besides 
no  province  has  ever  claimed  this  privilege.     If  it  be 

ART.  III.  c.  III.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  165 

a  city,  it  must  be  one  of  the  Patriarchal  ones :  now  of 
the  Patriarchal  cities  there  are  but  five,  Kome,  Antioch, 
Alexandria,  Constantinople  and  Jerusalem.  Which 
of  the  five  ? — all  are  pagan  except  Eome.  If  then  it 
must  be  a  city,  it  is  Eome ;  if  an  assembly,  it  is  that 
at  Eome.  But  no;  it  is  not  a  province,  not  a  town, 
not  a  simple  and  perpetual  assembly ;  it  is  a  single 
man,  established  head  over  all  the  Church :  A  faithful 
and  'prudent  servant  wliom  the  Lord  hath  appointed. 
Let  us  conclude  then  that  Our  Lord,  when  leaving 
this  world,  in  order  to  leave  all  his  Church  united, 
left  one  single  governor  and  lieutenant-general,  to 
whom  we  are  to  have  recourse  in  all  our  necessities. 

Which  being  so^,  I  say  to  you  that  this  servant 
general,  this  dispenser  and  governor,  this  chief  steward 
of  the  house  of  Our  Lord  is  S.  Peter,  who  on  this 
account  can  truly  say :  0  Lord,  for  L  am  thy  servant 
(Ps.  cxv.  16),  and  not  only  servant  but  doubly  so: 
/  am  thy  servant,  because  they  who  rule  well  are  worthy 
of  douUe  honour  (i  Tim.  v.  17).  And  not  only  thy 
servant,  but  also  son  of  thy  handmaid.  When  there  is 
some  servant  of  the  family  kin  he  is  trusted  the  more, 
and  the  keys  of  the  house  are  willingly  entrusted 
to  him.  It  is  therefore  not  without  cause  that  I 
introduce  S.  Peter  saying:  0  Lord,  for  I  am  thy 
servant,  &c.  For  he  is  a  good  and  faithful  servant,  to 
whom,  as  to  a  servant  of  the  same  kin,  the  Master  has 
given  the  keys :  To  thee  L  will  give  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven. 

S.  Luke  shows  us  clearly  that  S.  Peter  is  this 
servant ;  for  after  having  related  that  Our  Lord  had 
said  by  way  of  warning  to  his  disciples  (Luke  xii.)  : 
Messed    are    those    servants    whom   the  Lord  when  he 

1 66  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

Cometh  shall  find  imtching :  Amen  I  say  to  you,  that 
he  ivill  gird  himself,  and  make  them  sit  down  to  meat, 
and  passing  will  minister  to  them: — S.  Peter  alone 
asked  Our  Lord :  Dost  thou  speaJc  this  parable  to  us,  or 
likewise  to  all?  Our  Lord  answering  S.  Peter  does 
not  say:  Who  (thinkest  thou)  are  the  faithful  servants? 
• — as  he  had  said :  Blessed  are  those  servants, — but  : 
Who  {thinkest  thou)  is  the  faithful  and  wise  steward 
whom  his  Lord  setteth  over  his  family  to  give  them 
their  measure  of  wheat  in  due  season  ?  And  in  fact 
Theophylact  here  says  that  S.  Peter  asked  this  question 
as  having  the  supreme  charge  of  the  Church,  and 
S.  Ambrose  in  the  7th  book  on  S.  Luke,  says  that  the 
first  words,  blessed,  &c.  refer  to  all,  but  the  second,  who, 
thinkest  thou,  refer  to  the  bishops,  and  much  more  pro- 
perly to  the  supreme  bishop.  Our  Lord,  then,  answers 
S.  Peter  as  meaning  to  say :  what  I  have  said  in  general 
applies  to  all,  but  to  thee  particularly :  for  whom  dost 
thou  think  to  be  the  prudent  and  faithful  servant  ? 

And  truly,  if  we  sift  this  parable  a  little,  who  can 
be  the  servant  who  is  to  distribute  the  bread  except 
S.  Peter,  to  whom  the  charge  of  feeding  the  others  has 
been  given : — feed  my  sheep  ?  When  the  master  of 
the  house  goes  out  he  gives  the  keys  to  the  chief 
steward  and  procurator ;  and,  is  it  not  to  S.  Peter  that 
Our  Lord  said:  /  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  ?  Everytliing  has  reference  to  the 
governor,  and  the  rest  of  the  officers  depend  on  him 
for  their  authority,  as  all  the  building  does  upon  the 
foundation ;  thus  S.  Peter  is  called  the  stone  on  which 
the  Church  is  founded :  Thou  art  Cephas,  and  upon 
this  rock,  &c.  Now  Cephas  means  a  stone  in  Syriac 
as  well  as  in  Hebrew;  but  the  Latin  translator  has 

^fiT.  III.  c.  iii.j        The  Rtite  of  Faith,  167 

said  Peirus,  because  in  Greek  there  is  Trerpo^,  which 
also  means  stone,  like  petra.  And  Our  Lord  in  S. 
Matthew,  chapter  vii.,  says  that  the  wise  man  builds 
and  founds  his  house  on  the  rock,  supra  petram* 
Whereof  the  devil,  the  father  of  lies,  the  ape  of  Our 
Lord,  has  wished  to  make  a  sort  of  imitation,  founding 
his  miserable  heresy  principally  in  a  diocese  of  S. 
Peter,t  and  in  a  Rochelle.'^ 

Further,  Our  Lord  requires  that  this  servant  should 
be  prudent  and  faithful.  And  St.  Peter  truly  has 
these  two  qualities ;  for  how  could  prudence  be 
wanting  to  him,  since  neither  flesh  nor  blood  directs 
him  but  the  heavenly  Father  ?  And  how  could 
fidelity  fail  him,  since  Our  Lord  said :  /  have  prayed 
for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not  (Luke  xxii.  32)? — and 
he,  we  must  believe,  was  heard  for  his  reverence  (Heb. 
V.  7).  And  that  he  was  heard  he  gives  an  excellent 
testimony  when  he  adds :  And  thou  heing  converted, 
confirm  thy  brethren.  As  if  he  would  say  :  I  have 
prayed  for  thee,  and  therefore  be  the  confirmer  of  the 
others,  because  for  the  others  I  have  only  prayed  that 
they  may  have  a  secure  refuge  in  thee.  Let  us  then 
conclude  that  as  Our  Lord  was  one  day  to  quit  his 
Church  as  regards  his  corporal  and  visible  being,  he 
left  a  visible  lieutenant  and  vicar  general,  namely  S. 
Peter,  who  could  therefore  rightly  say  :  0  Lord,  for  I 
am  thy  servant. 

You  will  say  to  me :  Our  Lord  is  not  dead,  and 
moreover  is  always  with  his  Church,  why  then  do  you 
give  him  a  vicar  ?  I  answer  you  that  not  being  dead 
he  has  no  successor  but  only  a  vicar;  and  moreover 

*  Note  the  pronoun  Tianc.  f  Geneva.     [Tr.] 

X  Little  rock.     [Tr.] 

1 68  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

that  he  truly  assists  his   Church  in  all  things    and 
everywhere  by  his  invisible  favour,  but,  in  order  not 
to  make  a  visible  body  without  a  visible  head,  he  has 
willed  further  to  assist  it  in  the  person  of  a  visible 
lieutenant,  by  means  of  whom,  besides  invisible  favours, 
he  perpetually  administers  his  Church,  and  in  a  man- 
ner suitable  to  the  sweetness  of  his  providence.     You 
will  tell  me,  again,  that  there  is  no  other  foundation 
than  Our  Lord  in  the  Church :  No  one  can  lay  another 
foundation  than  that  which  is   laid,  which  is  Christ 
Jesus  (i  Cor.  iii.  ii).      I  grant  you  that  as  well  the 
Church  militant  as  the  triumphant  is  supported  and 
founded  on  Our  Lord,  as  on  the  principal  foundation : 
but  Isaias  has  foretold  to  us  that  in  the  Church  there 
were  to  be  two  foundations.     In  chapter  xxviii. :  Be- 
hold I  will  lay  a  stone  in  the  foundations  of  Sion,  a 
tried  stone,  a  corner  stone,  a  ^precious  stone,  founded  in 
the  foundation.     I  know  how  a  great  personage  explains 
it,   but   it  seems   to  me  that  that  passage  of  Isaias 
ought  certainly  to  be  interpreted  without  going  outside 
chapter  xvi.  of  St.  Matthew,  in  the  Gospel  of  to-day.* 
There  then  Isaias,  complaining  of  the  Jews  and  of  their 
prophets,  in  the  person  of   Our  Lord,   because  they 
would  not  believe : — Command,  command  again  ;  expect, 
expect  again,  and  what  follows, — adds :   Therefore  thus 
saith  the  Lord :  and  hence  it  was  the  Lord  who  said  : 
Behold  I  will  lay  a  stone  in  the  foundations  of  Sion. 
He  says  in  the  foundations,  because  although  the  other 
Apostles  were  foundations  of  the  Church :  {And  the 
wall  of  the  city,  says  the  Apocalypse  (xxi.    14),  had 
twelve  foundations,  and  in  them  the  twehe  names  of 
the  twelve  apostles  of  the  Lamh : — and  elsewhere :  Built 
*  Probably  S.  Peter's  Chair,  Jan.  or  Feb.  1596.     [Tr.] 

ART.  III.  0.  III.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  169 

wpon  the  foundation  of  the  prophets  and  apostles,  Jesus 
Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone  (Eph.  ii.  20)  : 
— and  the  Psalmist  (Ixxvi.)  :  The  foundations  thereof 
are  in  the  holy  mountains),  yet,  amongst  all,  there  is 
one  who  by  excellence  and  in  the  highest  sense  is 
called  stone  and  foundation,  and  it  is  he  to  whom  Our 
Lord  said :  Thou  art  Cephas,  that  is,  stone,  tried  stone. 
Listen  to  St.  Matthew :  he  declares  that  Our  Lord 
will  lay  a  tried  stone ; — what  trying  would  you  have 
other  than  this :  whom  do  men  say  that  the  Son  of  man 
is  ?  A  hard  question,  which  St.  Peter,  explaining  the 
secret  and  difficult  mystery  of  the  communication  of 
idioms,  answers  so  much  to  the  point  that  more  could 
not  be,  and  gives  proof  that  he  is  truly  a  stone,  saying : 
Thou  art  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  Isaias 
continues  and  says :  a  precious  stone  ;  hear  the  esteem 
in  which  Our  Lord  holds  St.  Peter :  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Barjona : — corner  stone ;  Our  Lord  does  not  say 
that  he  will  build  only  a  wall  of  the  church,  but  the 
whole, — My  Church ;  he  is  then  a  corner-stone : — 
founded  in  the  foundation ;  he  shall  be  a  foundation, 
but  not  first :  for  there  will  be  another  foundation — 
Christ  himself  Icing  the  chief  corner-stone.  See  how 
Isaias  explains  St.  Matthew,  and  St.  Matthew  Isaias. 

I  should  never  end  if  I  would  say  all  that  comes 
to  my  mind  when  I  have  this  subject  before  me. 
Now  let  us  see  the  conclusion  of  it  all.  The  true 
Church  ought  to  have  a  visible  head  in  its  government 
and  administration ;  yours  has  none,  therefore  it  is  not 
the  true  church.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  in  the 
world  one  true  Church  and  lawful,  which  has  a  visible 
head :  no  one  has  [but  ours],  therefore  ours  is  the  true 
Church.     Let  us  pass  on. 

170  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 


UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  (continued).  OF  THE  UNITY  OF 

Is  Jesus  Christ  divided  ?  No,  surely,  for  he  is  the 
God  of  peace,  not  of  dissension,  as  S.  Paul  taught 
throughout  the  Church.  It  cannot  then  be  that  the 
true  Church  should  be  in  dissension  or  division  of 
belief  and  opinion,  for  God  would  no  longer  be  its 
Author  or  Spouse,  and,  like  a  kingdom  divided 
against  itself,  it  would  be  brought  to  desolation.  As 
soon  as  God  takes  a  people  to  himself,  as  he  has  done 
the  Church,  he  gives  it  unity  of  heart  and  of  path : 
the  Church  is  but  one  body,  of  which  all  the  faithful 
are  members,  compacted  and  united  together  by  all 
its  joints;  there  is  but  one  spirit  animating  this 
body :  God  is  in  his  holy  place :  who  maketh  men  of 
one  manner  to  dwell  in  a  house  (Ps.  Ixvii.  7) ;  there- 
fore the  true  Church  of  God  must  be  united,  fastened 
and  joined  together  in  one  same  doctrine  and  belief. 

It  is  necessary,  says  S.  Irenseus  (iii.  3)  that  all  the 
faithful  should  come  together  and  unite  themselves  to 
the  Roman  Church  [on  account  of]  its  superior  ruling 
power.  She  is  the  mother  of  their  sacerdotal  dignity, 
says  Julius  I.  (ad  Euseb.)  "  She  is  the  commence- 
ment of  the  unity  of  the  priesthood,  she  is  the  bond  of 
unity,"  says  S.  Cyprian  (Ep.  55).  Again :  "  We  are 
not  ignorant  that  there  is  but  one  God,  one  Christ  and 

ART.  III.  c.  IV.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  171 

Lord,  whom  we  have  confessed,  one  Holy  Spirit,  one 
pastoral  office  (episcopatus)  in  the  Catholic  Church " 
(xlvi.  inter  Ep.).  The  good  Optatus  also  said  to  the 
Donatists  (ii.  2,  3) :  "  Thou  canst  not  deny  that 
thou  knowest  that  in  the  city  of  Eome  the  chief 
chair  has  been  first  granted  to  S.  Peter,  in  which  sat 
the  chief  of  the  Apostles,  S.  Peter,  whence  he  was 
called  Cephas ;  the  chair  in  which  the  unity-  of  the 
whole  was  preserved,  in  order  that  the  other  Apostles 
might  not  seek  to  put  forward  and  maintain  each  his 
own,  and  that  henceforward  he  might  be  a  schismatic 
who  would  set  up  another  chair  against  this  one 
chair.  Therefore  in  this  one  chair,  which  is  the  first 
of  its  prerogatives,  was  first  seated  S.  Peter."  These 
are  almost  the  words  of  this  ancient  and  holy  doctor ; 
and  every  Catholic  of  this  age  is  of  the  same  convic- 
tion. We  hold  the  Eoman  Church  to  be  our  refuge 
in  all  our  difficulties ;  we  all  are  her  humble  children, 
and  receive  our  food  from  the  milk  of  her  breasts ;  we 
are  all  branches  of  this  most  fruitful  stock,  and  draw 
no  sap  of  doctrine  save  from  this  root.  This  is  what 
clothes  us  all  with  the  same  livery  of  belief;  for 
knowing  that  there  is  one  chief  and  lieutenant  general 
in  the  Church,  what  he  decides  and  determines  with 
the  other  prelates  of  the  Church  when  he  is  seated  in 
the  chair  of  Peter  to  teach  Christendom,  serves  as  law 
and  measure  to  our  belief.  Let  there  be  error  every- 
where throughout  the  world,  yet  you  will  see  the 
same  faith  in  Catholics.  And  if  there  be  any  differ- 
ence of  opinion,  either  it  will  not  be  in  things  belong- 
ing to  the  faith,  or  else,  as  soon  as  ever  a  General 
Council  or  the  Eoman  See  shall  have  determined  it,  you 
will  see  every  one  submit  to  their  decision.     Our  under- 

172  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  11. 

standings  do  not  stray  away  from  one  another  in  their 
belief,  but  keep  most  closely  united  and  linked  together 
by  the  bond  of  the  superior  authority  of  the  Church,  to 
which  each  one  gives  in  with  all  humility,  steadying 
his  faith  thereon,  as  upon  the  pillar  and  ground  of 
truth.  Our  Catholic  Church  has  but  one  language  and 
one  same  form  of  words  throughout  the  whole  earth. 

On  the  contrary,  gentlemen,  your  first  ministers 
had  no  sooner  got  on  their  feet,  they  had  no  sooner 
begun  to  build  a  tower  of  doctrine  and  science  which 
was  visibly  to  reach  the  heavens,  and  to  acquire  them 
the  great  and  magnificent  reputation  of  reformers,  than 
God,  wishing  to  traverse  this  ambitious  design,  per- 
mitted amongst  them  such  a  diversity  of  language  and 
belief,  that  they  began  to  contradict  one  another  so 
violently  that  all  their  undertaking  became  a  miser- 
able Babel  and  confusion.  What  contradictions  has 
not  Luther's  reformation  produced!  I  should  never 
end  if  I  would  put  them  all  on  this  paper.  He  who 
would  see  them  should  read  that  little  book  of 
Frederick  Staphyl's  de  concordid  discordi,  and  Sanders, 
Book  7  of  his  Visible  Monarchy,  and  G-abriel  de  Preau, 
in  the  Lives  of  Heretics:  I  will  only  say  what  you 
cannot  be  ignorant  of,  and  what  I  now  see  before  my 

You  have  not  one  same  canon  of  the  Scriptures: 
Luther  will  not  have  the  Epistle  of  S.  James,  which 
you  receive.  Calvin  holds  it  to  be  contrary  to  the 
Scripture  that  there  is  a  head  in  the  Church;  the 
English  hold  the  reverse :  the  French  Huguenots 
hold  that  according  to  the  Word  of  God  priests  are 
not  less  than  bishops  ;  the  English  have  bishops  who 
govern  priests,   and   amongst   them   two  archbishops, 

ART.  III.  c.  IV.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  i  'j'i) 

one  of  whom  is  called  'primate,  a  name  which  Calvin 
so  greatly  detests :  the  Puritans  in  England  hold  as 
an  article  of  faith  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  preach, 
baptize,  pray,  in  the  Churches  which  were  formerly 
Catholic,  but  they  are  not  so  squeamish  in  these  parts. 
And  note  my  saying  that  they  make  it  an  article  of 
faith,  for  they  suffer  both  prison  and  banishment 
rather  than  give  it  up.  Is  it  not  well  known  that  at 
Geneva  they  consider  it  a  superstition  to  keep  any 
saint's  day  ?■ — yet  in  Switzerland  some  are  kept ;  and 
you  keep  one  of  Our  Lady.  The  point  is  not  that 
some  keep  them  and  others  do  not,  for  this  would  be 
no  contradiction  in  religious  belief,  but  that  what  you 
and  some  of  the  Swiss  observe  the  others  condemn  as 
contrary  to  the  purity  of  religion.  Are  you  not 
aware  that  one  of  your  greatest  ministers  teaches  that 
the  body  of  our  Lord  is  as  far  from  the  Lord's  Supper 
as  heaven  is  from  earth,  and  are  you  not  likewise  aware 
that  this  is  held  to  be  false  by  many  others  ?  Has 
not  one  of  your  ministers  lately  confessed  the  reality  of 
Christ's  body  in  the  Supper,  and  do  not  the  rest  deny 
it  ?  Can  you  deny  me  that  as  regards  Justification 
you  are  as  much  divided  against  one  another  as  you 
are  against  us : — witness  that  anonymous  contro- 
versialist. In  a  word,  each  man  has  his  own  language, 
and  out  of  as  many  Huguenots  as  I  have  spoken  to  I 
have  never  found  two  of  the  same  belief. 

But  the  worst  is,  you  are  not  able  to  come  to  an 
agreement: — for  where  will  you  find  a  trusted  arbi- 
trator ?  You  have  no  head  upon  earth  to  address 
yourselves  to  in  your  difficulties  ;  you  believe  that  the 
very  Church  can  err  herself  and  lead  others  into 
error :  you  would  not  put  your  soul  into  such  unsafe 

1 74  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  n. 

hands  ;  indeed,  you  hold  her  in  small  account.  The 
Scripture  cannot  be  your  arbiter,  for  it  is  concerning 
the  Scripture  that  you  are  in  litigation,  some  of  you 
being  determined  to  have  it  understood  in  one  way, 
some  in  another.  Your  discords  and  your  disputes 
are  interminable,  unless  you  give  in  to  the  authority 
of  the  Church.  Witness  the  Colloquies  of  Lune- 
bourg,  of  Malbron,  of  Montbeliard,  and  that  of  Berne 
recently.  Witness  Tilman  Heshusius  and  Erastus, 
to  whom  I  add  Brenz  and  BuUinger.  Take  the  great 
division  there  is  amongst  you  about  the  number  of  the 
Sacraments.  Now,  and  ordinarily  amongst  you,  only 
two  are  taught ;  Calvin  made  three,  adding  to  Baptism 
and  the  Supper,  Order  ;  Luther  here  puts  Penance  for 
the  third,  then  says  there  is  but  one  :  in  the  end,  the 
Protestants,  at  the  Colloquy  of  Eatisbonne,  at  which 
Calvin  assisted,  as  Beza  testifies  in  his  life,  confessed 
that  there  were  seven  Sacraments.  How  is  it  you  are 
divided  about  the  article  of  the  almightiness  of  God  ? 
— one  party  denying  that  a  body  can  by  the  divine 
power  be  in  two  places,  others  denying  absolute 
almightiness  ;  others  make  no  such  denials.  But  if  I 
would  show  you  the  great  contradictions  amongst  those 
whom  Beza  acknowledges  to  be  glorious  reformers  of 
the  Church,  namely,  Jerome  of  Prague,  John  Hus, 
Wicliff,  Luther,  Bucer,  CEcolampadius,  Zuingle,  Pomer- 
anius  and  the  rest,  I  should  never  come  to  an  end : 
Luther  can  sufficiently  inform  you  as  to  the  good 
harmony  there  is  amongst  them,  in  the  lamentation 
which  he  makes  a^^ainst  the  Zuinsflians  and  Sacramen- 
tarians,  whom  he  calls  Absaloms  and  Judases,  and 
fanatic  spirits  (in  the  year  1527). 

His  deceased   Highness   of    most    happy   memory, 

ART.  III.  c.  IV.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  175 

Emmanuel  [of  Savoy],  related  to  the  learned  Anthony 
Possevin,  that  at  the  Colloquy  of  Worms  when  the 
Protestants  were  asked  for  their  profession  of  faith, 
they  all  one  after  the  other  departed  from  the  assembly, 
as  being  unable  to  agree  together.  That  great  prince, 
most  worthy  of  trust,  relates  this  as  having  been 
present  there.  All  this  division  has  its  foundation  in 
the  contempt  which  you  have  for  a  visible  head  on  earth, 
because,  not  being  bound  as  to  the  interpretation  of 
God's  Word  by  any  superior  authority,  each  one  takes 
the  side  which  seems  good  to  him.  This  is  what  the 
wise  man  says,  that  among  the  proud  there  are  always 
contentions^  which  is  a  true  mark  of  heresy.  Those 
who  are  divided  into  several  parties  cannot  be  called 
by  the  name  of  Church,  because,  as  S.  Chrysostom 
says,  the  name  of  Christ  is  a  name  of  agreement  and 
concord.  But  as  for  us,  we  all  have  the  same  canon 
of  the  Scriptures,  one  same  head,  one  like  rule  for 
interpreting  them ;  you  have  a  diversity  of  canon,  and 
in  the  understanding  you  have  as  many  heads  and 
rules  as  you  are  persons.  We  all  sound  the  trumpet 
of  one  single  Gideon,  and  have  all  one  same  spirit  of 
faith  in  the  Lord,  and  in  his  Vicar,  the  sword  of  the 
decisions  of  God  and  the  Church,  according  to  the 
words  of  the  Apostles  :  It  hath  seemed  good  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  to  us  A  This  unity  of  language 
amongst  us  is  a  true  sign  that  we  are  the  army  of  the 
Lord,  and  you  can  but  be  acknowledged  as  Madianites, 
whose  opinions  are  only  cries  and  shouts :  each  in 
your  own  fashion  you  slash  at  one  another,  cutting 
one  another's  throats,  and  cutting  your  own  throats 
by  your  dissensions,  as  God  says  by  IsaiasJ:  The 
*  Prov  xiii.  la  t  Acts  xv.  28.  +  Isa.  xix. 

176  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

Egyptians  shall  fight  against  the  Egyptians  .  .  .  and 
the  spirit  of  Egypt  shall  be  broken.  And  S.  Augustine 
says  that  as  Donatus  had  tried  to  divide  Christ,  so  he 
himself  was  by  a  daily  separation  of  his  party  divided 
within  himself. 

This  mark  [of  unity]  alone  ought  to  make  you  quit 
your  pretended  church,  for  he  who  is  not  with  God  is 
against  God.  God  is  not  in  your  church,  for  he  only 
inhabits  a  place  of  peace,  and  in  your  church  there  is 
neither  peace  nor  concord. 



The  Church  of  Our  Lord  is  holy  ;  this  is  an  article  of 
faith.  Our  Lord  has  given  himself  for  it,  that  he  may 
sanctify  it.  It  is  a  holy  nation,  says  St.  Peter  ( i .  ii. 
9).  The  bridegroom  is  holy,  and  the  bride  holy.  She 
is  holy  as  being  dedicated  to  God,  as  the  Elders  under 
the  ancient  synagogue  were  called  holy  on  this  account 
alone ;  she  is  holy  again  because  the  Spirit  who  in- 
forms her  is  holy,  and  because  she  is  the  mystical 
body  of  a  head  who  is  called  most  holy ;  she  is  holy, 
moreover,  because  all  her  actions,  interior  and  exterior, 
are  holy ;  she  neither  believes  nor  hopes  nor  loves  but 
holily ;  in  her  prayers,  sermons,  sacraments,  sacrifices, 
she  is  holy.  But  this  Church  has  her  interior  sanctity, 
according  to  the  word  of  David  (Ps.  xliv.  14):  All 
the  glory  of  the  King's  daughter  is  within  ;  she  has  also 
her  exterior  sanctity  in  golden  borders  clothed   about 

ABT.  III.  0.  VI.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  177 

with  varieties  (lb.)  The  interior  sanctity  cannot  be 
seen;  the  exterior  cannot  serve  as  a  mark,  because  all 
tlie  sects  vaunt  it,  and  because  it  is  hard  to  recognise 
the  true  prayer,  preaching  and  administration  of  the 
Sacraments  ;  but  beyond  this  there  are  signs  by  which 
God  makes  his  Church  known,  which  are  as  it  were 
perfumes  and  odours ;  as  the  Spouse  says  in  the 
Canticles  (iv.  11):  The  smell  of  thy  garments  as  the 
smell  of  frankincense.  Thus  can  we  by  the  scent  of 
these  odours  and  perfumes  run  after  and  find  the  true 
Church  and  the  trace  of  the  son  of  the  unicornf'^ 


SECOND  MAEK  {continued),     the  true  church  ought 


The  Church  then  has  milk  and  honey  under  her  tongue 
and  in  her  heart,  which  is  interior  sanctity,  and  which 
we  cannot  see :  she  is  richly  dight  with  a  fair  robe, 
beautifully  bordered  with  varieties,  which  are  her  ex- 
terior sanctities,  which  can  be  seen.  But  because  the 
sects  and  heresies  disguise  their  clothing,  and  by  false 
stuffs  make  them  look  like  hers,  she  has,  besides  that, 
perfumes  and  odours  which  are  her  own,  and  these 
are  certain  signs  and  shinings  of  her  sanctity,  which 
are  so  peculiarly  hers,  that  no  other  society  can  boast 
of  having  them,  particularly  in  our  age. 

For,  first,  she  shines  in  miracles,  which  are  a  most 
sweet  odour  and  perfume,  and  are  express  signs  of  the 
*  Referring  probably  to  Psalm  xxviii.  6.   [Tr.] 

in,  M 

lyS  The  Catholic  Conlroversy.  [part  n. 

presence  of  the  immortal  God  with  her,  as  S.  Augus- 
tine styles  them.  And,  indeed,  when  Our  Lord  quitted 
this  world  he  promised  that  the  Church  should  be 
filled  with  miracles :  These  signs,  he  said,  shall  follow 
them  that  helieve :  in  my  name  they  shall  cast  out  devils, 
they  shall  speak  with  new  tongites :  they  shall  take  up 
serpents,  poison  shall  not  hurt  them,  and  by  the  imposi- 
tion of  hands  they  shall  heal  the  sick/''' 

Consider,  I  pray  you,  these  words  closely,  (i)  He 
does  not  say  that  the  Apostles  only  would  work  these 
miracles,  but  simply,  those  who  believe:  (2)  he  does 
not  say  that  every  believer  in  particular  would  work 
miracles,  but  that  those  who  believe  will  be  followed 
by  these  signs :  (3)  he  does  not  say  it  was  only  for 
them — ten  or  twenty  years — but  simply  that  miracles 
will  follow  them  that  believe.  Our  Lord,  then,  speaks 
to  the  Apostles  only,  but  not  for  the  Apostles  only  ;  he 
speaks  of  the  faithful ;  of  the  body  and  general  congre- 
gation t  of  the  Church ;  he  speaks  absolutely,  without 
limitation  of  time ;  let  us  take  his  holy  words  in  the 
extent  which  Our  Lord  has  given  them.  The  believers 
are  in  the  Church,  the  believers  are  followed  by  mira- 
cles, therefore  in  the  Church  there  are  miracles :  there 
are  believers  in  all  times,  the  believers  are  followed  by 
miracles,  therefore  in  all  times  there  are  miracles. 

But  let  us  examine  a  little  why  the  power  of 
miracles  was  left  in  the  Church.  There  is  no  doubt 
it  was  to  confirm  the  Gospel  preaching ;  for  S.  Mark 
so  testifies,  and  S.  Paul,  who  says  that  God  gave 
testimony  by  miracles  to  the  faith    which  they  an- 

*  Mark  uU. 

+  Six  words  in  the  MS.  here  cannot  be  distinctly  ascertained,  but 
their  sense  is  obvious.     [Tr.] 

ART.  III.  c.  VI.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  179 

nounced.*  God  placed  these  instruments  in  the  hand 
of  Moses,  that  he  might  be  believed  :  wherefore  Our 
Lord  said  that  if  he  had  not  done  miracles  the  Jews 
would  not  have  been  oblisred  to  believe  him.  Well 
now,  must  not  the  Church  ever  fight  with  infidelity  ? 
— and  why  then  would  you  take  away  from  her  this 
good  stick  which  God  has  put  into  her  hand  ?  I  am 
well  aware  that  she  has  not  so  much  need  of  it  as  at 
the  beginning ;  now  that  the  holy  plant  of  the  faith 
has  taken  firm  and  good  root,  one  need  not  water  it 
so  often ;  but,  all  the  same,  to  wish  to  have  the  effect 
altogether  taken  away,  the  necessity  and  cause  re- 
maining intact,  is  poor  philosophy. 

Besides,  I  beg  you  to  show  me  at  what  period  the 
visible  Church  may  have  been  without  miracles,  from 
the  time  that  it  began  until  this  present  ?  In  the  time 
of  the  Apostles  there  were  miracles  beyond  number; 
you  know  that  well.  After  that  time,  who  knows  not 
the  miracles,  related  by  Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus, 
worked  by  the  prayers  of  the  legion  of  Christian 
soldiers  who  were  in  his  army,  which  on  this  account 
was  called  thundering  ?  Who  knows  not  the  miracles 
of  S.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  S.  Martin,  S.  Anthony, 
S.  Nicholas,  S.  Hilarion,  and  the  wonders  concerninsr 
Theodosius  and  Constantine,  for  which  we  have  authors 
of  irreproachable  authority  —  Eusebius,  Eufinus,  S. 
Jerome,  Basil,  Sulpicius,  Athanasius  ?  Who  knows  not 
again  what  happened  at  the  Invention  of  the  Holy 
Cross,  and  in  the  time  of  Julian  the  Apostate  ?  In 
the  time  of  SS.  Chrysostom,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  many 
miracles  were  seen,  which  they  themselves  relate: 
why  then  would  you  have  the  same  Church  now  cease 

*  I  Cor.  ii.  4. 

i8o  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

from  miracles  ?  What  reason  would  there  be  ?  In 
truth,  what  we  have  always  seen,  in  all  varieties  of 
times,  accompanying  the  Church,  we  cannot  do  other- 
wise than  call  a  property  of  the  Church. 

The  true  Church  then  makes  her  sanctity  appear 
by  miracles.  And  if  God  made  so  admirable  the 
Propitiatory,  and  his  Sinai,  and  his  Burning  Bush, 
because  he  wished  to  speak  with  men,  why  shall  he 
not  have  made  miraculous  this  his  Church  in  which 
he  wills  to  dwell  for  ever  ? 



Here  now  I  desire  that  you  show  yourselves  reason- 
able, free  from  quibbling  and  from  obstinacy.  It  is 
found  on  informations  duly  and  authentically  taken 
that  about  the  commencement  of  this  century  S. 
Francis  of  Paula  was  renowned  for  undoubted  miracles, 
such  as  are  the  raising  of  the  dead  to  life.  We  find 
the  same  as  to  S.  Diego  of  Alcala.  These  are  not 
uncertain  rumours,  but  proved,  signed  informations, 
taken  in  regular  process  of  law. 

Would  you  dare  to  deny  the  apparition  of  the 
cross  granted  to  the  valiant  captain  Albukerque,  and 
to  all  those  in  his  fleet,  which  so  many  historians 
describe,"^  and  so  many  persons  had  part  in  ? 

*  See  Raynald,  ad  an.  15 13.     [Tr.] 

ART.  III.  c.  VII.]        The  Ride  of  Faith.  1 8 1 

The  devout  Gaspar  Berzee,  in  the  Indies,  healed  the 
sick  by  simply  praying  to  God  for  them  in  the  Mass, 
and  so  suddenly  that  other  than  God's  hand  could  not 
have  done  it. 

The  Blessed  Francis  Xavier  has  healed  the  paralysed, 
the  deaf,  the  dumb,  the  blind,  and  raised  a  dead  man 
to  life ;  his  body  has  had  power  to  remain  entire 
though  buried  with  lime,  as  those  have  testified  who 
saw  it  entire  fifteen  years  after  his  death ;  and  these 
two  died  within  the  last  forty-five  years. 

In  Meliapor  has  been  found  a  cross  cut  on  a  stone, 
which  is  considered  to  have  been  buried  by  the  Chris- 
tians in  the  time  of  S.  Thomas.  A  wonderful  but 
true  thing  ! — almost  every  year,  about  the  feast  of  this 
glorious  Apostle,  that  cross  sweats  a  quantity  of  blood, 
or  liquid  like  blood,  and  changes  colour,  becoming 
white,  pale,  then  black,  and  sometimes  blue,  brilliant 
and  then  of  softer  hue,  and  at  last  it  returns  to  its 
natural  colour :  this  many  people  have  seen,  and  the 
Bishop  of  Cochin  sent  a  public  attestation  of  it  to  the 
holy  Council  of  Trent.  Miracles,  therefore,  are  worked 
in  the  Indies,  where  the  faith  is  not  yet  established, 
a  whole  world  of  which  I  leave  on  one  side,  in  order 
to  observe  due  brevity. 

The  good  Father  Louis  of  Granada,  in  his  Introduc- 
tion on  the  Creed,  narrates  many  recent  and  unquestion- 
able miracles.  Amongst  others  he  brings  forward  the 
cures  which  the  Catholic  kings  of  France  have  worked 
in  our  age,  even  in  incurable  cases  of  king's  evil,  by 
saying  no  more  than  these  words  :  May  God  heal  you ; 
— and  the  king  touches  the  person,  no  other  disposi- 
tion being  required  than  Confession  and  Communion 
on  that  day. 

1 82  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

I  have  read  the  history  of  the  miraculous  cure  of 
James,  son  of  Claude  Andrew,  of  Belmont,  in  the 
bailiwick  of  Baulme  in  Burgundy.  He  had  been  help- 
less during  eight  years ;  after  making  his  devotions  in 
the  Church  of  S.  Claude,  on  the  very  day  of  the  feast, 
8th  June  1588,  he  found  himself  immediately  cured. 
Do  you  not  call  that  a  miracle  ?  I  am  speaking  of 
things  in  the  neighbourhood  ;  I  have  read  the  public 
act,  I  have  spoken  to  the  notary  who  took  it  and  sent 
it,  rightly  and  duly  signed — Vion.  Witnesses  were 
not  wanting,  for  there  were  people  in  crowds.  But 
why  do  I  stay  to  bring  forward  the  miracles  of  our 
age  ?  S.  Malachy,  S.  Bernard,  and  S.  Francis — were 
they  not  of  our  Church  ?  You  cannot  deny  it.  Those 
who  have  written  their  lives  are  most  holy  and  learned 
men,  for  S.  Bernard  himself  has  written  that  of  S. 
Malachy,  and  S.  Bonaventure  that  of  S.  Francis,  men 
who  lacked  neither  knowledge  nor  conscientiousness, 
and  still  many  miracles  are  related  therein.  But,  above 
all,  the  wonders  which  take  place  now,  at  our  gates,  in 
the  sight  of  our  princes  and  of  our  whole  Savoy,  near 
Mondovi,  ought  to  close  the  door  against  all  obstinacy. 

Now,  what  will  you  say  to  this  ?  Will  you  say 
that  Antichrist  will  do  miracles  ?  S.  Paul  testifies 
that  they  will  be  false, "^^^  and  the  greatest  S.  Johu 
mentions  is  that  he  will  make  fire  descend  from 
heaven ;  Satan  can  work  miracles,  indeed  has  done  so, 
no  doubt,  but  God  will  leave  a  prompt  remedy  with  his 
Church;  for,  to  those  false  miracles,  the  servants  of  God, 
Elias  and  Enoch,  as  the  Apocalypse  and  interpreters 
witness,  will  oppose  other  miracles  of  very  different 
make.     For  not  only  will  they  employ  fire  to  punish 

*  1  Thess.  ii,  9. 

AiiT.  III.  u.  VII.]        The  Rtile  of  Faith.  1 8 


their  enemies  miraculously,  but  will  have  power  to 
shut  the  heaveus  so  that  there  may  be  no  rain,  to 
change  and  convert  the  waters  into  blood,  and  to  strike 
the  earth  with  what  chastisements  they  like  for  three 
days  and  a  half:  after  their  death  they  shall  rise 
again  and  ascend  to  heaven ;  the  earth  shall  tremble 
at  their  ascension.  Then,  therefore,  by  the  opposition 
of  the  true  miracles,  the  illusions  of  Antichrist  will  be 
discovered ;  and  as  Moses  at  last  made  the  magicians 
of  Pharaoh  confess  :  The  finger  of  God  is  here,  so  Elias 
and  Enoch  will  effect  that  their  enemies  shall  give 
glory  to  the  God  of  heaven :  Elias  will  do  at  that  time 
some  of  those  holy  prophet's  deeds  of  his,  which  he 
did  of  old  to  put  down  the  impiety  of  the  Baalites  and 
other  professors  of  false  religions. 

I  wish  then  to  say :  ( i )  that  the  miracles  of  Anti- 
christ are  not  such  as  those  we  bringj  forward  for  the 
Church ;  and  therefore  it  does  not  follow  that  if  those 
are  not  marks  of  the  Church  these  likewise  are  not  so. 
The  former  will  be  proved  false  and  be  overcome  by 
greater  and  more  solid  ones,  the  latter  are  solid,  and 
no  one  can  oppose  to  them  more  certain  ones :  (2) 
the  wonders  of  Antichrist  will  be  simply  an  illusion  of 
three  years  and  a  half ;  but  the  miracles  of  the  Church 
are  so  properly  hers,  that  since  her  foundation  she  has 
always  shone  in  miracles.  The  miracles  of  Antichrist 
will  be  unnatural,  and  will  not  endure  ;  but  in  the 
Church  they  are  grafted  as  it  were  naturally  on  her 
supernatural  nature,  and  therefore  they  ever  accom- 
pany her,  to  verify  these  words  :  These  signs  shall 
follow  them  that  believe. 

You  will  be  ready  to  say  that  the  Donatists  worked 
miracles,  according  to  S.   Augustine :   but   they  were 

184  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [partil 

only  certain  visions  and  revelations  of  which  they 
themselves  boasted,  without  any  public  testimony. 
Certainly  the  Church  cannot  be  proved  true  by  these 
private  revelations ;  on  the  contrary,  these  visions 
themselves  cannot  be  proved  or  held  as  true  save  by 
the  testimony  of  the  Church,  says  the  same  S.  Augus- 
tine. And  if  Vespasian  healed  a  blind  and  a  lame 
man,  the  doctors  themselves,  according  to  Tacitus, 
decided  that  it  was  a  blindness  and  an  infirmity  which 
were  not  incurable :  it  is  no  marvel  then  if  the  devil 
was  able  to  heal  them.  A  Jew  having  been  baptized 
went  and  presented  himself  to  Paulus,  a  Novatian 
bishop,  to  be  rebaptized,  says  Socrates  ;  *  the  water  of 
the  font  immediately  disappeared.  This  wonder  was 
not  to  confirm  the  truth  of  Novatianism,  but  of  holy 
Baptism,  which  it  was  not  right  to  repeat.  In  the 
same  manner  were  some  wonders  done  amongst  the 
Pagans,  says  S.  Augustine,  not  in  proof  of  Paganism, 
but  of  innocence,  virginity,  fidelity,  which,  wherever 
they  are,  are  loved  and  valued  by  God  who  is  the 
author  thereof.  Further,  these  wonders  are  done  but 
rarely,  and  from  them  no  conclusion  can  be  drawn  : 
the  clouds  sometimes  give  forth  light,  but  it  is  only 
the  sun  which  has  for  its  mark  and  property  the 
giving  of  light.  Let  us  then  conclude  this  subject : 
the  Church  has  always  been  accompanied  by  miracles, 
solid  and  certain  as  those  of  her  Spouse  ;  therefore  she 
is  the  true  Church :  for,  to  use  the  argument  of  the 
good  Nicodemus  (John  iii.  2)  in  like  case,  I  will  say : 
No  society  can  do  these  miracles  which  this  does,  so 
glorious  and  so  continual,  unless  God  was  with  it. 
And  what  did  our  Lord   say  to   the  disciples  of  S. 

*  vii.  17. 

ART.  III.  c.  VII. J        The  Rule  of  Faith.  185 

John  (Matt.  xi.  5) :  8ay,  the  hlind  see,  the  lame  walk,  the 
deaf  hear,  to  show  that  he  was  the  Messias.  Hearing 
that  in  the  Church  are  done  such  grand  miracles,  we 
must  conclude  that  the  Lord  is  indeed  in  this  place 
(Gen.  xxviii.  16).  But  as  regards  your  pretended 
Church,  I  can  say  nothing  more  to  it  than  :  If  it  can 
believe,  all  things  are  possible  to  him  that  believes 
(Mark  ix.  22)  :  if  it  were  the  true  Church  it  would 
be  followed  by  miracles.  You  acknowledge  to  me 
that  it  is  not  your  province  to  work  miracles,  nor  to 
drive  out  devils ;  once  it  turned  out  ill  with  one  of 
your  great  masters  who  wanted  to  try  it, — so  says 
Bolsec.  "  Those  raised  up  the  living  from  the  dead," 
says  Tertullian,^  "  these  make  dead  men  out  of  the 
living."  A  rumour  is  current  that  one  of  yours  has 
once  cured  a  demoniac ;  it  is  however  not  stated  when 
or  how  the  person  was  cured,  nor  what  witnesses  there 
were.  It  is  easy  for  apprentices  to  a  trade  to  make 
a  mistake  in  their  first  trial.  Certain  reports  are 
often  started  amongst  you  to  keep  the  simple  people 
going,  but  having  no  author  they  must  be  without 
authority.  Besides  this,  in  driving  out  the  devil  we 
must  not  so  much  regard  what  is  done  as  we  must 
consider  the  manner  and  the  form  in  which  it  is  done ; 
if  it  is  by  the  rightful  prayers,  and  invocations  of  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ.  Again,  one  swallow  does  not 
make  the  summer;  it  is  the  perpetual  and  ordinary 
succession  of  miracles  which  is  the  mark  of  the  true 
Church,  not  something  accidental.  But  it  would  be 
fighting  with  a  shadow  and  with  air  to  refute  this 
rumour,  which  is  so  timid  and  so  feeble  that  nobody 
ventures  to  say  from  which  side  it  came. 

*  De  Prflesc.  xxx. 

1 86  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [paetil 

The  total  answer  that  I  have  got  from  you  in  this 
extreme  necessity  is  that  people  do  you  a  wrong  when 
they  ask  miracles  from  you.  And  so  they  do,  I  agree 
with  you ;  it  would  be  turning  you  into  ridicule,  like 
asking  a  blacksmith  to  make  an  emerald  or  a  diamond. 
Nor  do  I  ask  any  from  you :  only  I  request  you  to 
confess  frankly  that  you  have  not  made  your  appren- 
ticeship with  the  Apostles,  Disciples,  Martyrs  and  Con- 
fessors, who  have  been  masters  of  the  craft. 

But  when  you  say  you  have  no  need  of  miracles, 
because  you  do  not  want  to  establish  a  new  faith,  tell 
me  then  again  whether  S.  Augustine,  S.  Jerome,  S. 
Gregory,  S.  Ambrose  and  the  rest  preached  a  new 
doctrine.  And  why  then  were  there  done  miracles  so 
great  and  so  numerous  as  theirs  ?  Certainly  the  Gospel 
was  better  received  in  the  world  than  it  is  at  present ; 
there  were  then  pastors  more  excellent ;  many  martyrs 
and  miracles  had  gone  before;  but  the  Church  was 
still  not  wanting  in  that  gift  of  miracles,  for  the 
greater  glory  of  most  holy  religion.  Or  if  miracles 
were  to  cease  in  the  Church,  it  would  have  been  in 
the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great,  after  the  Empire 
had  become  Christian,  the  persecutions  had  ceased  and 
Christianity  been  quite  secured ;  but  so  far  were  they 
from  ceasing  then  that  they  were  multiplied  on  all  sides. 

Moreover,  the  doctrine  which  you  preach  has 
never. been  proclaimed,  either  in  general  or  in  detail; 
your  heretical  predecessors  have  preached  it,  with 
each  of  whom  you  agree  on  some  points,  and  with 
all  on  none,  as  I  will  make  clear  afterwards.  Where 
was  your  church  eighty  years  ago  ?  It  has  only 
just  begun,  and  you  call  it  old.  Ah !  you  say,  we 
have  made  no  new  Church,  we  have  rubbed  up  and 

ART.  m.  0.  VII.]        The  Rtile  of  Faith.  187 

cleaned  the  old    money,  which,  having  long  lain  in 
decayed    buildings,     had     become    discoloured,     and 
encrusted  with  dirt  and  mould.      Say  that  no  more,  I 
beg  you,  that  you  have  the  metal  and  the  mould. 
Are  not  the  faith,  the  Sacraments,  necessary  ingredi- 
ents   in    the     composition     of     the     Church  ? — and 
you  have  changed   everything   both   in  the  one  and 
the  other.     You  are  then  false  coiners,  if  you  do  not 
show  the  power  which  you  claim  to  put  these  stamps 
on  the  King's  coin.      But  let  us  not  delay  on  this. 
Have  you  purified  this  Church,  have  you  cleaned  this 
money  ?     Show  us  then  the  characters  which  it  had 
when  you  say  that  it  fell  on  the  ground  and  began  to 
get  rusty.     It  fell,  you  say,  in  the  time  of  S.  Gregory, 
or  a  little  after.     You  may  say  what  you  like,  but  at 
that  time  it  had  the  character  of  miracles ; — show  it 
to  us  now  ?     For  if  you  do  not  show  us  most  unmis- 
takably the  inscription  of  the  King  on  your  money, 
we  will  show  it  you  on  ours ;  ours  will  pass  as  royal 
and  good,  yours,  as  being  light  and  clipped,  will  be 
sent  back  to  the  melting-pot.     If  you  would  represent 
to  us  the  Church  as  it  was  in  the  time  of  S.  Augustine, 
show  it  to  us  not  only  speaking  well  but  doing  well, 
in  miracles  and  holy  operations,  as  it  was  then.     If 
you  would  say  that  then  it  was  nearer  than  it  is  now, 
I  answer  that  so  notable  an  interruption  as  that  which 
you  pretend  of  nine   hundred   or   a   thousand  years, 
makes  this  money  so  strange  that  unless  we  see  on  it, 
in  large  letters,  the  ordinary  characters,  the  inscrip- 
tion and  the  image,  we   will   never  receive  it.     No, 
uo :  the  ancient  Church  was  powerful  in  all  seasons, 
in  adversity  and  prosperity,  in  work  and  in  word,  like 
her  Spouse ;   yours  has  nought  but  talk,  whether  in 

1 88  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

prosperity  or  in  adversity.  At  least  let  it  now  show 
some  vestiges  of  the  ancient  mark :  otherwise  it  will 
never  be  received  as  the  true  Church,  nor  as  daughter 
of  that  ancient  mother.  If  it  would  boast  further,  it 
must  have  silence  imposed  upon  it  with  these  holy 
words :  *  If  you  are  the  children  of  Abraham,  do  the 
works  of  Ahraham.  The  true  Church  of  believers  is 
to  be  ever  accompanied  by  miracles;  there  is  no 
Church  of  our  age  which  can  show  them  save  ours; 
therefore  ours  alone  is  the  true  Church. 



Prophecy  is  a  very  great  miracle,  which  consists  in 
the  certain  knowledge  which  the  human  understanding 
has  of  things,  without  any  experience  or  any  natural 
reasoning,  by  supernatural  inspiration;  and  therefore 
all  that  I  have  said  of  miracles  in  general  ought  to  be 
predicated  of  this.  The  prophet  Joel  foretold  (ii.)  that 
in  the  last  days,  that  is,  in  the  time  of  the  Gospel 
Church,  as  S.  Peter  interprets  (Acts  ii.),  Our  Lord 
would  pour  out  his  holy  Spirit  upon  his  servants, 
and  that  they  should  prophesy  ;  as  Our  Lord  had  said  : 
These  signs  shall  follow  them  that  believe.     Prophecy 

*  John  viii.  39. 

ART.  III.  c.  VIII,]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  189 

then  is  to  be  ever  in  the  Church,  where  the  servants  of 
God  are,  and  where  he  ever  pours  out  his  Holy  Spirit. 

The  Angel  says  in  the  Apocalypse  (xix.  10)  that 
the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy :  now 
this  testimony  of  the  assurance  of  Our  Lord  is  not 
only  given  for  unbelievers,  but  principally  for  believers, 
St.  Paul  says  (i  Cor.  xiv.  22);  how  then  do  you  say 
that  Our  Lord  having  given  it  once  to  the  Church  has 
taken  it  away  afterwards  ?  The  chief  reason  for  which 
it  was  granted  remaining  still,  the  concession  therefore 
also  remains.  Add,  as  I  said  of  miracles,  that  at  all 
times  the  Church  has  had  prophets ;  we  cannot  there- 
fore say  that  this  is  not  one  of  her  qualities  and  pro- 
perties, and  a  good  portion  of  her  dowry. 

Jesus  Christ,  ascending  on  high^  led  captivity  captivey 
he  gave  gifts  to  men  .  .  .  And  some  indeed  he  gave  to 
he  apostles,  and  some  prophets,  and  others  evangelists,  and 
others  pastors  and  teachers  (Eph.  iv.) :  the  apostolic, 
evangelic,  pastoral  and  teaching  spirit  is  always  in  the 
Church,  aud  why  shall  the  spirit  of  prophecy  also  not 
be  left  in  her  ?  It  is  a  perfume  of  the  garments  of 
this  Spouse. 

There  have  been  scarcely  any  saints  in  the  Church 
who  have  not  prophesied.  I  will  only  name  these 
more  recent  ones :  S.  Bernard,  S.  Francis,  S.  Dominic, 
S.  Anthony  of  Padua,  S.  Bridget,  S.  Catherine  of 
Siena,  who  were  most  sound  Catholics.  The  saints 
of  whom  I  spoke  above  are  of  the  number,  and  in  our 
age  Caspar  Berz^e  and  Francis  Xavier.  You  would 
find  no  one  of  the  older  generation  who  did  not  repeat 
with  full  belief  some  prophecy  of  Jean  Bourg ;  many 
of  them  had  seen  and  heard  him :  The  testimony  of 
Jesus  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy. 

igo  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

And  now  bring  forward  some  one  of  yours  who  has 
prophesied  in  your  church.  We  know  that  the  sybils 
were  in  some  sort  the  prophetesses  of  the  Gentiles, 
and  almost  all  the  Ancients  speak  of  them.  Balaam 
also  prophesied,  but  it  was  for  the  true  Church,  and 
hence  their  prophecies  did  not  give  credit  to  the 
church  in  which  they  were  made,  but  to  the  Church 
for  whom  they  were  made : — though  I  deny  not  that 
there  was  among  the  Gentiles  a  true  Church,  consist- 
ing of  a  few  persons,  maintaining  by  divine  grace  faith 
in  a  true  God  and  the  observance  of  the  natural  com- 
mandents.  Witness  Job,  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
the  good  Cornelius  with  seven  other  soldiers  fearing 
God,  in  the  New.  Now  where  are  your  prophets  ? 
And  if  you  have  none  be  sure  that  you  are  not  of  that 
body  for  the  edification  of  which  the  Son  of  God  has 
left  [them],  according  to  the  word  of  S.  Paul  (Eph.  iv.). 
The  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy.  Calvin 
has  tried,  apparently,  to  prophesy  in  the  preface  to  his 
Catechism  of  Geneva ;  but  his  prediction  is  so  favour- 
able to  the  Catholic  Church  that  when  we  get  its 
fulfilment  we  will  be  content  to  consider  him  as  some- 
thing of  a  prophet. 



Heee  are  the  sublimer  instructions  of  Our  Lord  and 
the  Apostles.     A  rich  young  man  was  protesting  that 

ART.  III.  c.  IX.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  191 

he  had  observed  the  commandments  of  God  from  his 
tender  youth.  Our  Lord,  who  sees  everything,  looking 
upon  him  loved  him,  a  sign  that  he  vt^as  such  as  he  had 
said  he  was,  and  still  he  gave  him  this  counsel  (Matt. 
xix.  Mark,  x.) :  If  thou  woiddst  he  perfect,  go  sell  all 
that  thou  hast,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven, 
and  come,  follow  me.  S.  Peter  invites  us  by  his  ex- 
ample and  that  of  his  companions  (Matt,  xix.)  :  Behold 
we  have  left  all  things  and  have  followed  thee.  Our 
Lord  returns  this  solemn  promise :  You  who  have 
followed  me  .  .  .  shall  sit  upo7i  twelve  seats,  judging  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  And  every  one  that  shall  have 
left  house,  or  hrethren,  or  sisters,  or  father,  or  mother,  or 
wife,  or  children^  or  lands  for  my  name's  sake,  shall 
receive  an  hundred-fold,  and  shall  possess  life  everlasting. 
You  see  the  words,  now  behold  the  example :  The  Son 
of  man  hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head  (Luke  ix.  5  8)  : 
he  was  entirely  poor  to  make  us  rich;  he  lived  on 
alms,  says  S.  Luke — certain  women  ministered  to  him 
of  their  suhstance  (viii.  3).  In  two  Psalms  *  which 
properly  regard  his  person,  as  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul 
interpret,  he  is  called  a  beggar.  When  he  sent  his 
Apostles  to  preach  he  taught  them  that  they  should 
carry  nothing  on  their  journey  save  a  staff  only,  that 
they  should  take  neither  scrip,  nor  bread,  nor  money 
in  their  purse,  that  they  should  be  shod  with  sandals 
and  not  be  furnished  with  two  coats.  I  know  that 
these  instructions  are  not  absolute  commands,  though 
the  last  was  commanded  for  a  time ;  nor  do  I  mean 
to  say  that  they  were  more  than  most  wholesome 
counsels  and  advice. 

*  Namely,  Psalms  cviii.  and  xxxix. ;  the  one  referred  to  by  S.  Peter 
in  Acts  i.,  the  other  by  S.  Paul  in  Heb.  x.     [Tr.] 

192  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

Here  are  others  similar  on  another  subject  (Matt, 
xix.) :  There  are  eunuchs  who  roere  horn  so  from  their 
mother's  womb :  and  there  are  eunuchs  who  have  made 
themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake.  He 
that  can  receive  it,  let  him  receive  it. 

It  is  precisely  that  which  had  been  foretold  by 
Isaias  (Ivi.) :  Let  not  the  eunuch  say :  hehold  I  am 
a  dry  tree.  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  to  the  eunuchs: 
They  that  shall  keep  my  Sabbaths,  and  shall  choose  the 
things  that  please  me,  and  shall  hold  fast  my  covenant y 
I  will  give  them  in  my  house  and  within  my  walls  a 
'place  and  a  name  better  than  sons  and  daughters:  I  will 
give  them  an  everlasting  name  which  shall  never  perish. 
Who  sees  not  here  that  the  Gospel  exactly  comes  to  fit 
in  with  prophecy  ?  And  in  the  Apocalypse  xiv.  those 
who  sang  a  new  canticle  which  no  other  than  they 
could  utter  were  those  who  are  not  defiled  with  women^ 
for  they  are  virgins:  these  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever 
he  goeth.  To  this  refer  the  exhortations  of  S.  Paul 
( I  Cor.  vii.) :  It  is  good  for  a  man  not  to  touch  a 
woman ;  .  .  .  now,  /  say  to  the  unmarried  and  to  the 
loidows :  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  so  continue^  even  as  I. 
.  .  .  Concerning  virgins  I  have  no  commandment ^  hit  I  give 
counsel,  as  having  received  mercy  of  the  Lord  to  be  faith- 
ful. And  here  is  the  reason :  He  that  is  without  a 
wife  is  solicitous  for  the  things  that  belong  to  the  Lord, 
how  he  may  please  God.  But  he  that  is  with  a  wife  is 
solicitous  for  the  things  of  the  world,  how  he  may  please 
his  wife,  and  he  is  divided.  And  the  unmarried  wo7nan 
and  the  virgin  thinketh  on  the  things  of  the  Lord  that 
she  may  be  holy  both  in  body  and  in  spirit ;  but  she 
that  is  married  thinketh  on  the  things  of  the  world^  how 
she  may  please  her  husband.     And  this  I  speak  for  your 

ART.  III.  0.  IX.]         The  Rtile  of  Faith,  193 

frojit :  not  to  cast  a  snare  upon  you,  hut  for  that  which 
is  decent,  and  which  may  give  you  power  to  attend  upon 
the  Lord  without  impediment  .  .  .  He  that  giveth  his 
virgin  in  marriage  doth  well,  and  he  that  giveth  her  not 
doth  better.  Then  speaking  of  the  widow :  Let  her 
marry  to  whom  she  will,  only  in  the  Lord.  But  more 
blessed  shall  she  be,  if  she  so  remain,  according  to  my 
counsel ;  a,nd  L  think  that  L  also  have  the  Spirit  of  God. 
Behold  the  instructions  of  Our  Lord  and  his  Apostles, 
having  the  authority  of  the  example  of  Oar  Lord,  of 
Our  Lady,  of  S.  John  Baptist,  of  S.  Paul,  S.  John,  S. 
James,  who  have  all  lived  in  virginity ;  and  in  the 
Old  Testament,  Elias  and  Eliseus,  as  the  Ancients  have 
pointed  out. 

Lastly,  the  most  humble  obedience  of  Our  Lord, 
which  is  so  particularly  signified  in  the  Evange- 
lists, not  only  to  his  Father,  to  which  he  was  obliged, 
but  to  S.  Joseph,  to  his  Mother,  to  Csesar  (to  whom 
he  paid  tribute),  and  to  all  creatures  in  his  Passion : — 
for  the  love  of  us.  He  humbled  himself,  becoming  obedient 
unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  cross  (Phil.  ii.  8)  : — the 
humility  which  he  shows  in  having  come  to  teach  us, 
when  he  said  (Matt,  xx.,  Luke  xxii.) :  The  Son  of  man 
is  not  come  to  be  ministered  unto  but  to  minister.  .  .  .  L 
am  amongst  you  as  he  that  serveth — are  not  these  per- 
petual repetitions  and  expositions  of  that  most  sweet 
lesson  (Matt,  xi.) :  Learn  of  me,  because  L  am  meek  and 
hiLmble  of  heart,  and  that  other  (Luke  ix.) :  Lf  any  man 
will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his 
cross  daily  and  follow  me  ?  He  who  keeps  the  com- 
mandments denies  himself  sufficiently  for  salvation ;  to 
humble  oneself  in  order  to  be  exalted  is  quite  enough : 
but  still  there  remains  another  obedience,  humility  and 

III.  N 

1 94  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  n. 

self-abnegnation,  to  which  the  examples  and  instruc- 
tions of  Our  Lord  invite  us.  He  would  have  us  learn 
humility  from  him,  and  he  humbles  himself,  not  only 
to  those  whose  inferior  he  was,  in  so  far  as  he  was 
wearing  the  form  of  a  servant,  but  also  to  his  actual 
inferiors.  He  desires  then,  that  as  he  abased  himself, 
never  indeed  against  his  duty  but  beyond  duty,  we 
also  should  voluntarily  obey  all  creatures  for  love  of 
him :  he  would  have  us  renounce  ourselves,  after  his 
example,  but  he  has  renounced  his  own  will  so  deci- 
sively that  he  has  submitted  to  the  cross  itself,  and 
has  served  his  disciples  and  servants — witness  he  who 
finding  it  extraordinary  said  (John  xiii.) :  Thou  shalt 
not  wash  my  feet  for  ever.  What  remains  then  save 
that  we  should  recognise  in  his  words  a  sweet  invita- 
tion to  a  voluntary  submission  and  obedience  towards 
those  to  whom  otherwise  we  have  no  obligation,  not 
resting,  however  lightly,  on  our  own  will  and  judg- 
ment, according  to  the  advice  of  the  Wise  Man 
(Prov.  iii.),  but  making  ourselves  subjects  and  enslaved 
to  God,  and  to  men  for  the  love  of  the  same  God.  So 
the  Eechabites  are  magnificently  praised  in  Jeremias 
xxxv.,  because  they  obeyed  their  father  Jonadab  in 
things  very  hard  and  extraordinary,  in  which  he  had 
no  authority  to  oblige  them,  such  as  were  not  to  drink 
wine,  neither  they  nor  any  of  theirs,  not  to  sow,  not  to 
plant,  not  to  have  vineyards,  not  to  build.  Fathers 
certainly  may  not  so  tightly  fasten  the  hands  of  their 
posterity,  unless  they  voluntarily  consent  thereto.  The 
Eechabites,  however,  are  praised  and  blessed  by  God 
in  approval  of  this  voluntary  obedience,  by  which  they 
had  renounced  themselves  with  an  extraordinary  and 
more  perfect  renunciation. 

ART.  III.  0.  IX.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  195 

Well  now,  let  us  return  to  our  road.  vSuch  signal 
examples  and  instructions  as  these,  in  poverty,  chastity, 
and  abnegation  of  self, — to  whom  have  they  been  left  ? 
To  the  Church.  But  why  ?  Our  Lord  tells  us :  He 
ivho  can  receive,  let  him  receive.  And  who  can  receive 
them  ?  He  who  has  the  gift  of  God ;  and  no  one  has 
the  gift  of  God  but  he  who  asks  for  it ; — but.  Iwiv  shall 
they  call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed.  .  .  . 
How  shall  they  believe  .  .  .  without  a  preacher  !  And 
how  can  they  yreach  unless  they  be  sent  (Eoni.  x.)  ? 
Now,  there  is  no  mission  outside  the  Church,  there- 
fore the  he  who  can  receive  let  him  receive,  is  addressed 
immediately  only  to  the  Church,  or  for  those  who  are 
in  the  Church,  since  outside  the  Church  it  cannot  be 
put  in  practice.  S.  Paul  shows  it  more  clearly :  1 
speak  this,  he  says,  for  your  profit,  not  to  make  snares 
and  nets  for  you,  but  to  persuade  you  to  that  which  is 
decent,  and  which  may  give  you  power  and  facility  to 
attend  itpon  the  Lord,  and  to  honour  him  without 
impediment.  And,  in  fact,  the  Scriptures  and  the 
examples  that  are  therein  are  only  for  our  utility  and 
instruction ;  the  Church  then  ought  to  use,  and  put 
into  practice,  these  most  holy  counsels  of  her  Spouse : 
otherwise  they  would  have  been  vainly  and  uselessly 
left,  and  proposed  to  her :  indeed  she  has  well  known 
how  to  take  them  for  herself,  and  to  profit  by  them : — 
and  see  how. 

Our  Lord  had  no  sooner  ascended  into  heaven  than 
every  one  amongst  the  first  Christians  sold  his  goods 
and  brought  the  price  to  the  feet  of  the  Apostles. 
And  S.  Peter,  putting  in  practice  the  first  rule,  said: 
Gold  and  silver  have  I  none  (Acts  iii.)  S.  Philip  had 
four    daughters,  virgins,  whom    Eusebius   testifies    to 

196  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

have  always  remained  such.  S.  Paul  kept  virginity 
or  celibacy  ;  so  did  S.  John  and  S.  James ;  and  when 
S.  Paul  (i  Tim.  v.)  reproves,  as  having  damnation, 
certain  young  widows  who,  afUr  they  have  grown 
luanton  in  Christ  will  marry,  having  damnation  because 
they  have  left  their  first  faith, — the  fourth  Council  of 
Carthage  (at  which  S.  Augustine  assisted)  S.  Epiphanius, 
S.  Jerome,  with  all  the  rest  of  antiquity,  understand 
it  of  widows  who,  being  vowed  to  God  and  to  the 
observance  of  chastity,  broke  their  vows,  entering  into 
the  ties  of  marriage  against  the  faith  which  previously 
they  had  given  to  the  heavenly  Spouse.  From  that 
time,  then,  the  counsel  of  [being]  eunuchs,  and  the  other 
which  S.  Paul  gives,  were  practised  in  the  Church. 

Eusebius  of  Csesarea  records  that  the  Apostles  insti- 
tuted two  lives ;  the  one  according  to  commandment, 
the  other  according  to  counsel.  And  that  so  it  was, 
evidently  appears  ;  for,  on  the  model  of  the  perfection 
of  life  followed  and  counselled  by  the  Apostles,  a 
countless  number  of  Christians  have  so  closely  formed 
theirs,  that  history  is  full  of  it.  Who  does  not  know 
how  admirable  are  the  accounts  given  by  Philo  the 
Jew  of  the  life  of  the  first  Christians  at  Alexandria, 
in  the  book  entitled  Of  the  Life  of  the  Beseechers,* 
wherein  he  treats  of  S.  Mark  and  his  disciples,  as 
Eusebius,  Nicephorus,  S.  Jerome,  bear  witness ;  and 
amongst  the  rest,  Epiphanius,t  who  assures  us  that 
Philo,  when  writing  of  the  Jessenes,  was  speaking  of 
the  Christians  under  this  name,  who  for  some  time 
after  the  Ascension  of  Our  Lord,  whilst  S.  Mark  was 
preaching  in  Egypt,  were  so  called,  either  on  account 

*  De  vitd  Contemplativa  sive  supplicium  virtutibus. 
t  Hser.  xxix.  cc.  4,  5. 

ART.  III.  c.  IX.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  197 

of  the  name  of  Jesse,  from  whose  race  Our  Lord 
sprang,  or  on  account  of  the  name  of  Jesus,  their 
Master's  name,  which  they  ever  had  in  their  mouth. 
Now  he  who  will  look  at  the  books  of  Philo,  will  see 
in  these  Jessenes  or  Therapeuts  (healers  or  servers)  a 
most  perfect  renunciation  of  oneself,  of  one's  flesh,  of 
one's  goods. 

S.  Martial,  a  disciple  of  Our  Lord,  in  an  Epistle 
which  he  wrote  to  the  Tolosians,  relates  that  at  his 
preaching  the  blessed  Valeria,  wife  of  an  earthly  king, 
had  vowed  the  virginity  of  her  body  and  of  her  spirit 
to  the  celestial  King.  S.  Denis,  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
Hierarchy,  says  that  the  Apostles,  his  masters,  called 
the  religious  of  his  time  Therapeuts,  that  is,  servers  or 
adorers,  on  account  of  the  special  service  and  worship 
they  paid  to  God,  or  monks,*  on  account  of  the  union 
with  God,  in  which  they  made  progress.  Behold  the 
perfection  of  the  Evangelic  life  excellently  practised  in 
this  first  time  of  the  Apostles  and  their  disciples,  who, 
having  traced  this  path  thus  straight  to  heaven,  and 
ascended  by  it,  have  been  followed,  one  after  another, 
by  many  excellent  Christians.  S.  Cyprian  observed 
continency,  and  gave  all  his  goods  to  the  poor,  as 
Pontius  the  Deacon  records.  The  same  did  S.  Paul, 
the  first  Hermit,  S.  Anthony  and  S.  Hilarion,  witness 
S.  Athanasius  and  S.  Jerome.  S.  Paulinus,  Bishop  of 
Nola — S.  Ambrose  is  our  authority — of  an  ilhistrious 
family  in  Guienne,  gave  all  his  goods  to  the  poor,  and, 
as  if  discharged  from  a  weighty  burden,  said  farewell 
to  his  father  and  his  family,  to  serve  his  God  more 
devotedly.  By  his  example  it  was  that  S.  Martin 
quitted  all,  and  excited  others  to  the  same  perfection. 

*  Moj'cixoc  from  ix6vos,  one  or  single.    [Tr.] 

198  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  h 

George,  Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  relates  that  St.  Chry- 
sostom  gave  up  all  and  became  a  monk.  Politian,  an 
African  gentleman,  returning  from  the  Emperor's  court, 
related  to  S.  Augustin,  that  in  Egypt  there  were  a 
great  number  of  monasteries  and  religious,  who  mani- 
fested a  great  sweetness  and  simplicity  in  their 
manners,  and  that  there  was  a  monastery  at  Milan, 
outside  the  town,  furnished  with  a  good  number  of 
religious,  living  in  great  union  and  brotherhood,  to 
whom  S.  Ambrose,  bishop  of  the  place,  was  as  Abbot. 
He  told  them  also  that  near  the  town  of  Treves,  there 
was  a  monastery  of  good  religious,  in  which  two  cour- 
tiers of  the  Emperor  had  become  monks ;  and  that 
two  young  ladies  who  were  betrothed  to  these  two 
courtiers,  having  heard  the  resolution  of  their  spouses, 
similarly  vowed  their  virginity  to  God,  and  retired 
from  the  world  to  live  in  religion,  poverty,  and  chastity. 
S.  Augustin  himself  tells  all  this.  Possidius  relates 
the  same,  and  says  that  he  had  instituted  a  monastery ; 
which  S.  Augustine  himself  relates  in  one  of  his 
Epistles.  These  great  Fathers  have  been  followed  by 
S.  Gregory,  Damascene,  Bruno,  Eomuald,  Bernard, 
Dominic,  Francis,  Louis,  Anthony,  Vincent,  Thomas, 
Bona  venture,  who  having  all  renounced  and  said  an 
eternal  adieu  to  the  world  and  its  pomps,  have  presented 
themselves  as  a  perfect  holocaust  to  the  living  God. 

Now  let  us  conclude.  These  consequences  seem  to 
me  inevitable.  Our  Lord  has  had  these  instructions 
and  counsels  of  chastity,  poverty,  and  obedience  laid 
down  in  his  Scriptures :  he  has  practised  them,  and 
has  had  them  practised  in  his  early  Church :  all  the 
Scripture  and  all  the  life  of  Our  Lord  were  but  an 
instruction  for  the  Church  which  was  to  make  profit 

ART.  III.  c.  X.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  199 

by  them,  and  it  was  then  to  be  one  of  the  institutions 
of  the  Church,  this  chastity,  poverty,  obedience  or 
self-renunciation.  Moreover,  the  Church  has  always 
put  in  practice  these  things  at  all  times  and  in  every 
season ;  this  then  is  one  of  her  properties  :  and  what 
would  be  the  use  of  so  many  exhortations  if  they 
were  not  to  be  put  in  practice  ?  The  true  Church 
therefore  ought  to  shine  in  the  perfection  of  the 
Christian  life ;  not  so  that  everybody  in  the  Church 
is  bound  to  follow  it ;  it  is  enough  that  it  be  found 
in  some  notable  members  and  parts,  in  order  that 
nothing  may  be  written  or  counselled  in  vain,  and 
that  the  Church  may  make  use  of  all  the  parts  of 
Holy  Scripture. 


AND    GIVEN    UP. 

The  Church  which  is  now,  following  the  voice  of  her 
Pastor  and  Saviour,  and  the  track  beaten  by  her 
ancestors,  praises,  approves,  and  greatly  esteems  the 
resolution  of  those  who  give  themselves  up  to  the 
practice  of  the  Evangelical  counsels,  of  whom  she  has 
a  very  great  number.  I  have  no  doubt  that  if  you 
had  frequented  the  assemblies  of  the  Chartreux, 
Camaldolese,  Celestines,  Minims,  Capuchins,  Jesuits, 
Theatines    and    numberless     others,    amongst    whom 

200  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

religious  discipline  flourishes,  you  would  be  uncertain 
whether  you  should  call  them  earthly  angels  or 
heavenly  men,  and  that  you  would  not  know  which 
to  admire  the  more,  whether  in  such  blooming  youth 
so  perfect  a  chastity,  or  in  such  great  knowledge  so 
profound  a  humility,  or  in  so  much  diversity  so  close 
a  fraternity :  and  all,  like  heavenly  bees,  work  in  and 
compose,  with  the  rest  of  Christianity,  the  honey  of 
the  Gospel,  these  by  preachings,  these  by  writings, 
these  by  meditations  and  prayers,  these  by  teaching 
and  disputations,  these  by  the  care  of  the  sick,  these 
by  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  under  the 
authority  of  the  pastors.  Who  should  ever  detract 
from  the  glory  of  so  many  religious  of  all  orders,  and 
of  so  many  secular  priests,  who,  leaving  their  country, 
or,  to  say  it  better,  their  own  world,  have  exposed 
themselves  to  the  mercy  of  wind  and  tide,  to  get  to  the 
nations  of  the  New  World,  in  order  to  lead  them  to 
the  true  faith,  and  to  enlighten  them  with  the  light 
of  the  Gospel ;  who,  without  other  equipment  than 
a  lively  confidence  in  the  Providence  of  God,  without 
other  expectation  than  of  labours,  miseries  and  martyr- 
dom, without  other  aim  than  the  honour  of  God  and 
the  salvation  of  souls,  here  hastened  amongst  the 
Cannibals,  Canarians,  Negroes,  Brazilians,  Malays, 
Japanese,  and  other  foreign  nations,  and  made  them- 
selves prisoners  there,  banishing  themselves  from  their 
own  earthly  country  in  order  that  these  poor  people 
might  not  be  banished  from  the  heavenly  Paradise  ? 
I  know  that  some  Ministers  have  been  thither,  but 
they  went  having  their  means  of  support  from  men, 
and  when  these  failed  they  returned  and  did  no  more, 
because  an  ape  is  always  an  ape,  but  ours  remained 

ART.  HI.  0.  X.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  201 

there,  in  perpetual  continency  to  fertilise  the  Church 
with  these  new  plants,  in  extreme  poverty  to  enrich 
these  people  with  the  Gospel,  and  died  in  bondage  to 
place  that  world  in  Christian  liberty. 

But  if,  instead  of  making  your  profit  of  these 
examples,  and  refreshing  your  minds  with  the  sweet- 
ness of  so  holy  a  perfume,  you  turn  your  eyes  towards 
certain  places  where  monastic  discipline  is  altogether 
ruined,  and  where  there  remains  nothing  sound  but 
the  habit ; — you  will  force  me  to  say  that  you  are 
looking  for  the  sewers  and  dung  heaps,  not  the 
gardens  and  orchards.  All  good  Catholics  regret  the 
ill-behaviour  of  these  people,  and  blame  the  negligence 
of  the  pastors  and  the  uncontrollable  ambition  of 
certain  persons  who,  being  determined  to  have  power 
and  authority,  hinder  legitimate  elections,  and  the 
order  of  discipline,  in  order  to  make  the  temporal 
goods  of  the  Church  their  own.  What  can  we  do  ? 
The  master  has  sown  good  seed,  but  the  enemy  has 
oversown  cockle.  The  Church,  at  the  Council  of 
Trent,  had  looked  to  the  good  ordering  of  these  things, 
but  its  ordinances  are  despised  by  those  who  ought  to 
put  them  into  execution ;  and  so  far  are  Catholic 
doctors  from  consenting  to  this  evil  that  they  consider 
it  a  great  sin  to  enter  into  such  disorderly  monasteries 
as  these.  Judas  prevented  not  the  honour  of  the 
Apostolic  order,  nor  Lucifer  of  the  angelic,  nor 
Nicholas  of  the  diaconate ;  and  in  the  same  way 
these  abominable  men  ou^jht  not  to  tarnish  the  rioht- 
eousness  of  so  many  devout  monasteries,  which  the 
Catholic  Church  has  preserved  amidst  all  the  dissolu- 
tion of  this  age  of  iron,  in  order  that  not  one  word  of  her 
Spouse  should  be  in  vain  or  fail  to  be  put  in  practice. 

202  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [pabtil 

On  tbe  contrary,  gentlemen,  your  pretended  church 
despises  and  contradicts  all  this  as  much  as  she  can. 
Calvin  in  the  4th  Book  of  his  InstiUUions  aims  only 
at  the  abolition  of  the  observance  of  the  Evangelical 
counsels,  and  you  cannot  show  me  any  effort  or  good 
will  amongst  your  party,  in  which  every  one  down  to 
the  ministers  marries,  every  one  labours  to  gather 
together  riches,  nobody  acknowledges  any  other 
superior  than  force  makes  him  submit  to — an 
evident  sign  that  this  pretended  church  is  not  the 
one  for  which  Our  Lord  has  preached  and  draw 
the  picture  of  so  many  excellent  examples.  For 
if  everybody  marries,  what  will  become  of  the 
advice  of  S.  Paul  ( i  Cor.  vii.) :  It  is  good  for  a  man 
not  to  touch  a  woman  ?  If  everybody  runs  after 
money  and  possessions,  to  whom  will  that  word  of 
Our  Lord  (Matt,  vi.)  be  addressed  :  Lay  not  up  for 
yourselves  treasures  on  earth,  or  that  other  (lb.  xix) : 
Go,  sell  all,  give  to  the  poor?  If  every  one  will 
govern  in  his  turn,  where  shall  be  found  the  practice 
of  that  most  solemn  senteuce  (Luke  ix) :  He  rvho  will 
come  after  me  let  him  deny  himself?  If  then  your 
Church  puts  itself  in  comparison  with  ours,  ours  will 
be  the  true  Spouse,  who  puts  in  practice  all  the  words 
of  her  Beloved,  and  leaves  not  one  talent  of  the  Scrip- 
ture idle  ;  yours  will  be  false,  who  hears  not  the  voice 
of  the  Beloved,  yea,  despises  it.  For  it  is  not  reason- 
able that  to  keep  yours  in  credit  we  should  make 
vain  the  least  syllable  of  the  Scriptures ,  which  being 
addressed  only  to  the  true  Church,  would  be  vain  and 
useless  if  in  the  true  Church  all  these  parts  are  not 
made  use  of. 

ART,  III.  c.  XI.]        The  Riile  of  Faith.  20 




That  great  Father,  Vincent  of  Lerins,  in  his  most  use- 
ful Memorial,  says  that  he  must  before  all  things  have 
a  great  care  to  believe  "  that  which  has  been  believed 
by  all  [always  and  everywhere] "  .  .  .*  such  as  the 
jugglers  and  tinkers ;  for  the  rest  of  the  world  call  us 
Catholic ;  and  if  we  add  Eonian,  it  is  only  to  inform 
people  of  the  See  of  that  Bishop  who  is  general  and 
visible  Pastor  of  the  Church.  And  already  in  the 
time  of  S.  Ambrose  to  be  Eoman  in  communion  was 
the  same  thino-  as  to  be  Catholic. 

But  as  for  your  church,  it  is  called  everywhere 
Huguenot,  Calvinist,  Heretical,  Pretended,  Protestant, 
New,  or  Sacramentarian.  Your  church  was  not  before 
these  names,  and  these  names  were  not  before  your 
church,  because  they  are  proper  to  it.  Nobody  calls 
you  Catholics,  you  scarcely  dare  to  do  so  yourselves. 
I  am  well  aware  that  amongst  you  your  churches  call 
themselves  Eeformed,  but  just  as  much  right  to  that 
name  have  the  Lutherans,  and  the  Ubiquitarians,  Ana- 
baptists, Trinitarians,  and  other  offshoots  of  Luther, 
and  they  will  never  yield  it  to  you.  The  name  of 
religion  is  common  to  the  Church  of  the  Jews  and  of 
the  Christians,  in  the  Old  Law  and  in  the  New ;  the 
name  of  Catholic  is  proper  to  the  Church  of  Our  Lord ; 

*  There  is  an  lixatxiB  in  the  MS,  here.  In  the  earlier  part  of  the 
broken  sentence  the  saint  has  apparently  been  saying  that  Catholics 
are  called  Romans  by  the  lower  orders.     [Tr,] 

204  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [pakth. 

the  name  of  Eeformed  is  a  blasphemy  against  Our  Lord, 
who  has  so  perfectly  formed  and  sanctified  his  Church 
iu  his  blood,  that  it  must  never  take  other  form  than 
of  his  all  lovely  Spouse,  of  pillar  and  ground  of  truth. 
One  may  reform  the  nations  in  particular,  but  not  the 
Church  or  religion.  She  was  rightly  formed,  change 
of  formation  is  called  heresy  or  irreligion.  The  tint 
of  Our  Saviour's  blood  is  too  fair  and  too  bright  to  re- 
quire new  colours. 

Your  church,  then,  calling  itself  Eeformed,  gives  up 
its  part  in  the  form  which  the  Saviour  had  established. 
But  I  cannot  refrain  from  telling  you  what  Beza, 
Luther,  and  Peter  Martyr  think  on  this.  Peter 
Martyr  calls  you  Lutherans,  and  says  you  are  brothers 
to  them ;  you  are  then  Lutherans ;  Luther  calls  you 
"  fanatics "  and  Sacramentarians ;  Beza  calls  the 
Lutherans  Consubstantiators  and  Chymists,  and  yet  he 
puts  them  in  the  number  of  Eeformed  churches.  See 
then  the  new  names  which  the  reformers  acknowledge 
for  one  another.  Your  church,  therefore,  not  having 
even  the  name  of  Catholic,  you  cannot  with  a  good 
conscience  say  the  Apostles'  Creed;  if  you  do,  you 
judge  yourselves,  who,  confessing  the  Church  Catholic 
and  universal,  obstinately  keep  to  your  own,  which 
most  certainly  is  not  such.  If  S.  Augustine  were 
living  now,  he  would  remain  in  our  Church,  which 
from  immemorial  time  is  in  possession  of  the  name  of 

AET.  III.  0.  XII,]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  205 



The  Church  to  be  Catholic  must  be  universal  in 
time,  and  to  be  universal  in  time  it  must  be  ancient ; 
antiquity  then  is  a  property  of  the  Church.  And  in 
relation  to  heresies  it  must  be  more  ancient  than  any 
of  them,  and  must  precede  all,  because,  as  Tertullian 
excellently  says :  *  "  Error  is  a  corruption  of  truth, 
truth  then  must  precede."  The  good  seed  is  sown 
first,  the  enemy  who  oversows  cockle  comes  afterwards. 
Moses  was  before  Abiron,  Dathan,  and  Core ;  the 
Angels  were  before  the  devils ;  Lucifer  stood  in  the 
light  before  he  fell  into  the  eternal  darkness;  the  pri- 
vation must  follow  the  form.  S.  John  says  of  heretics 
( I  Ep.  ii.  1 9) :  They  went  out  from  u^ ;  they  were 
then  within  before  they  went  out;  the  going  out  is 
heresy,  the  being  within  is  fidelity ;  the  Church  then 
precedes  heresy.  So  the  coat  of  Our  Lord  was  whole 
before  it  was  divided.  And  although  Ismael  was 
before  Isaac,  that  does  not  signify  that  error  was  before 
truth,  but  that  the  true  shadow,  Judaism,  was  before 
the  body,  Christianity,  as  S.  Paul  says  (Gal.  iv.) 

Tell  us  now,  I  pray  you, — quote  the  time  and  the 
place  when  and  where  our  Church  first  appeared  after  the 
Gospel  ? — the  author  and  doctor  who  called  it  together. 
I  will  use  the  very  words  of  a  doctor  and  martyr  of 
our  age,t  and  they  are  worthy  of  close  attention. 

*  De  Praesc.  xxix.  +  Campion,  Decern  Rationed,  7. 

2o6  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parth. 

"You  own  to  us,  and  would  not  dare  to  do  other- 
wise, that  for  a  time  the  Eoman  Church  was  holy, 
Catholic,  Apostolic.  Certainly  then,  when  it  deserved 
those  holy  praises  of  the  Apostle  (Rom.  i.  xv.  xvi.) : 
Your  faith  is  spoken  of  in  the  whole  world.  .  .  .  I  mahe 
a  commemoration  of  you  always.  .  .  .  I  know  that  ivhen 
I  come  to  you  I  shall  come  in  the  abundance  of  the  Messing 
of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  .  .  .  All  the  Churches  of  Christ 
salute  you.  .  .  .  For  your  obedience  is  published  in 
every  place ;  then,  when  S.  Paul,  in  prison  free,  sowed 
the  Gospel ;  when  S.  Peter  was  governing  the  Church 
assembled  in  Babylon ;  when  Clement,  so  highly 
praised  by  the  Apostle,  was  stationed  at  the  rudder; 
when  the  profane  Caesars,  like  Nero,  Domitian,  Trajan, 
Antoninus,  were  massacring  the  Bishops  of  Rome  ;  yea 
and  then  also  when  Damasus,  Siricius,  Anastasius,  and 
Innocent  were  holding  the  Apostolic  helm  :  this  on 
the  testimony  of  Calvin  himself,  for  he  freely  con- 
fesses that  at  that  time  they  had  not  yet  strayed  from 
the  Evangelic  doctrine.  Well  then,  when  was  it  that 
Rome  lost  this  widely  renowned  faith  ?  When  did  it 
cease  to  be  what  it  had  been  ? — at  what  time  ? — under 
what  bishop  ? — by  what  means  ? — by  what  force  ? — 
by  what  steps  did  the  strange  religion  take  possession 
of  the  City  and  of  the  wliole  world  ? — what  protest, 
what  troubles,  what  lamentations  did  it  evoke  ?  How  ! 
— was  everybody  asleep  throughout  the  whole  world, 
while  Rome,  Rome  I  say,  was  forging  new  Sacraments, 
new  Sacrifices,  and  new  doctrines  ?  Is  there  not  to 
be  found  one  single  historian,  either  Greek  or  Latin, 
friend  or  stranger,  to  publish  or  leave  behind  some 
traces  of  his  commentaries  and  memoirs  on  so  great  a 
matter  ? " 

ART.  III.  c.  XII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  207 

And,  in  good  truth,  it  would  be  a  strange  hap  if 
historians,  who  have  been  so  curious  to  note  the  most 
trifling  changes  in  cities  and  peoples  had  forgotten 
the  most  noteworthy  of  all  those  which  can  occur,  that 
is,  the  change  of  religion  in  the  most  important  city 
and  province  of  the  world,  which  are  Eome  and  Italy. 

I  ask  you,  gentlemen,  whether  you  know  when  our 
Church  began  the  pretended  error.  Tell  us  frankly ; 
for  it  is  certain  that,  as  S.  Jerome  says,^  "to  have 
reduced  heresy  to  its  origin  is  to  have  refuted  it." 
Let  us  trace  back  the  course  of  history  up  to  the  foot 
of  the  cross ;  let  us  look  on  this  side  and  on  that,  we 
shall  never  see  that  this  Catholic  Church  has  at  any 
time  changed  its  aspect — it  is  ever  itself,  in  doctrine 
and  in  Sacraments. 

We  have  no  need  against  you,  on  this  important 
point,  of  other  witnesses  than  the  eyes  of  our  fathers 
and  grandfatliers  to  say  when  your  pretended  Church 
began.  In  the  year  1 5 1 7  Luther  commenced  his 
Tragedy:  in  '34  and  '35  they  composed  an  act 
in  these  parts ;  Zwingle  and  Calvin  were  the  chief 
players  in  it.  Would  you  have  me  detail  by  list  with 
what  fortune  and  deeds,  by  what  force  and  violence, 
this  reformation  gained  possession  of  Berne,  Geneva, 
Lausanne,  and  other  towns — what  troubles  and  woes 
it  brought  forth  ?  You  will  not  find  pleasure  in  this 
account ;  we  see  it,  we  feel  it.  In  a  word,  your 
Church  is  not  yet  eighty  years  old ;  its  author  is 
Calvin  ;  its  result  the  misery  of  our  age.  Or  if  you 
would  make  it  older,  tell  us  where  it  was  before  that 
time.  Beware  of  saying  that  it  existed  but  was  in- 
visible ; — for  if  it  were  not  seen  who  can  say  that  it 

*  Adv.  Lucif.  28, 

2o8  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partil 

existed  ?  Besides,  Luther  contradicts  you,  who  con- 
fesses that  iu  the  beginning  he  was  quite  alone. 

Now,  if  Tertullian  already  in  his  time  bears  witness 
that  Catholics  refuted  the  errors  of  heretics  by  their 
posteriority  and  novelty,  when  the  Church  was  only 
in  her  youth — "  We  are  wont,"  says  he,*  "  to  pre- 
scribe against  heretics,  for  brevity's  sake,  on  the  argu- 
ment of  posteriority  " — how  much  more  right  have 
we  now  ?  And  if  one  of  the  Churches  must  be  the 
true,  this  title  falls  to  ours  which  is  most  ancient ; 
and  to  your  novelty  the  infamous  name  of  heresy. 



Although  the  Church  might  be  ancient,  yet  it  would 
not  be  universal  in  time  if  it  had  failed  at  any  period. 
The  heresy  of  the  Nicolaites  is  ancient  but  not  uni- 
versal, for  it  only  lasted  a  very  little  while.  And  as 
a  whirlwind  which  seems  ready  to  displace  the  sea 
then  suddenly  is  lost  in  itself,  or  as  a  mushroom, 
which  is  born  of  some  noxious  vapour  in  a  night, 
appears  and  in  a  day  is  gone, — so  every  heresy, 
ancient  as  it  may  be,  has  at  last  disappeared,  but  the 
Church  endures  perpetually.t 

*  Adv.  Hermog.,  c.  i. 

f  Here  occurs  a  passage  on  the  perpetuity  of  the  Church,  which  has 
already  appeared,  in  somewhat  fuller  form,  in  Part  I.  chaps,  ix.,  x. 
The  reader  is  referred  to  these  chapters  and  to  the  Preface.     fTr.] 

ART.  III.  c.  XIII.]      The  Rule  of  Faith,  209 

I  will  say  to  you,  as  I  have  said  above :  show  me 
a  decade  of  years  since  Our  Lord  ascended  into  heaven 
in  which  decade  our  Church  has  not  existed.  The 
reason  why  you  find  yourselves  unable  to  say  when 
our  Church  began  is  that  it  has  always  existed.  And 
if  you  would  care  to  make  yourselves  honestly  clear 
about  this,  Sanders  in  his  Visible  Monarchy,  and 
Gilbert  Genebrard  in  his  Chronology  would  furnish 
you  light  enough,  and  particularly  the  learned  Csesar 
Baronius  in  his  Annals.  But  if  you  are  not  willing 
all  at  once  to  abandon  the  books  of  your  masters,  and 
have  not  your  eyes  blinded  with  too  excessive  a  pas- 
sion, you  will,  if  you  look  closely  into  the  Centuries 
of  Magdebourg,  see  everywhere  nothing  but  the  actions 
of  Catholics ;  for,  says  very  well  a  learned  man  of  our 
age,  if  they  had  not  collected  these  there  they  would 
have  left  one  thousand  five  hundred  years  without  his- 
tory.    I  will  say  something  on  this  point  afterwards. 

Now,  as  to  your  Church, — let  us  suppose  its  lie  to 
be  truth,  that  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles ;  it 
will  not  on  that  account  be  the  Catholic  Church,  for 
the  Catholic  Church  must  be  universal  in  time:  she 
must  then  always  continue.  But,  tell  me,  where  was 
your  Church  a  hundred,  two  hundred,  three  hundred 
years  ago  ?  Point  it  out  you  cannot,  for  it  did  not 
exist :  therefore  it  is  not  the  true  Church.  It  existed, 
some  one  will  perhaps  say  to  me,  but  unknown. 
Goodness  of  God!  who  cannot  say  the  same? — Adamite, 
Anabaptist,  everybody  will  take  up  this  argument.  I 
have  already  shown  that  the  Church  militant  is  not 
invisible ;  I  have  shown  that  she  is  universal  in  time ; 
I  will  show  you  that  she  cannot  be  unknown. 


2 1  o  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 



The  universality  of  the  Church  does  not  require  that 
all  provinces  or  missions  receive  the  Gospel  at  once,  it 
is  enough  that  they  do  so  one  after  another ;  in  such 
sort,  however,  that  the  Church  is  always  seen,  and  is 
always  known  as  that  which  has  existed  throughout 
the  whole  world  or  the  greater  part  thereof ;  so  that 
one  may  be  able  to  say :  Come  let  tos  go  up  into  the 
mountain  of  the  Lord  (Is.  ii.  3).  For  the  Church  shall 
be  as  the  sun,  says  the  Psalm,  and  the  sun  is  not 
always  shining  equally  in  all  countries :  enough  if  by 
the  end  of  the  year  there  is  no  one  who  can  hide  from 
its  heat  (Ps.  xviii.)  So  will  it  suffice  that  by  the  end 
of  the  world  Our  Lord's  prediction  be  fulfilled,  that  it 
behoves  that  penance  and  remission  of  sins  should  he 
preached  in  his  name  among  all  nations,  beginning  at 
Jerusalem  (Luke  ult.). 

Now  the  Church  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles  every- 
where spread  forth  its  branches,  covered  with  the  fruits 
of  the  Gospel,  as  S.  Paul  testifies  (Eom.  i.)  S.  Irenseus 
says  the  same  of  his  time,t  speaking  of  the  Eoman  or 
papal  Church,  to  which  he  will  have  all  the  rest  of  the 
Church  subject  on  account  of  its  superior  authority. 

Prosper  speaks  of  our  Church,  not  of  yours,  when 

*  This  passage  on  the  universality  of  the  Church  is  tlie  same  aa 
Part  I.  c.  xi. ;  see  previous  note.     [Tr.] 
+  iii.  3. 

ART.  III.  c.  XIV.]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  2 1 1 

he  says :  *  "  In  the  pastoral  honour,  Eome,  see  of  S. 
Peter,  is  head  of  the  universe,  which  she  has  not 
reduced  to  her  dominion  by  war  and  arms,  but  has 
acquired  by  religion."  You  see  clearly  that  he  speaks 
of  the  Church,  that  he  acknowledged  the  Pope  of 
Eome  as  its  head.  In  the  time  of  S.  Gregory  there 
were  Catholics  everywhere,  as  may  be  seen  by  the 
Epistles  which  he  wrote  to  bishops  of  almost  all 
nations.  In  the  time  of  Gratian,  Valentinian  and 
Justinian,  there  were  everywhere  Roman  Catholics,  as 
may  be  seen  by  their  laws.  S.  Bernard  says  the  same 
of  his  time ;  and  you  know  well  that  it  was  so  in  the 
time  of  Godfrey  de  Bouillon.  Since  then,  the  same 
Church  has  come  to  our  age,  ever  Pioman  and  papal. 
So  that  even  if  our  Church  now  were  much  less  than 
it  is,  it  would  not  cease  to  be  most  Catholic,  because 
it  is  the  same  Roman  Church  which  has  been,  and 
which  has  possessed  all  the  provinces  of  the  nations, 
and  peoples  without  number : — but,  it  is  still  now 
extended  over  the  whole  world ;  in  Transylvania, 
Poland,  Hungary,  Bohemia,  and  throughout  all  Ger- 
many ;  in  France,  in  Italy,  in  Sclavonia,  in  Candia,  in 
Spain,  Portugal,  Sicily,  j\Ialta,  Corsica,  in  Greece,  in 
Armenia,  in  Syria,  and  everywhere. 

Shall  I  add  to  the  list  the  Eastern  and  Western 
Indies  ?  He  who  would  have  a  compendium  of  these 
must  attend  a  general  Chapter  or  assembly  of  the 
Religious  of  S.  Francis,  called  Observantines.  He 
would  see  Religious  arrive  from  every  quarter  of  the 
world.  Old  and  New,  under  the  obedience  of  a  simple, 
lowly,  insigniticant  man :  so  that  these  alone  would 
seem  enough  for  the  Church  to  fulfil  that  part  of  the 

*  De  Jngratis.  40. 

212  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  n. 

prophecy  of  Malachy  (i.) :  In  every  'place  there  is  sacri- 
fice .   .  .  to  my  name. 

On  the  contrary,  gentlemen,  the  pretenders  pass  not 
the  Alps  on  our  side,  nor  the  Pyrenees  on  the  side  of 
Spain ;  Greece  knows  you  not ;  the  other  three  parts 
of  the  world  do  not  know  who  you  are,  and  have 
never  heard  of  Christians  without  sacrifice,  without 
altar,  without  head,  without  cross,  as  you  are ;  in 
Germany  your  comrades  the  Lutherans,  Brentians, 
Anabaptists,  Trinitarians,  eat  into  your  portion ;  in 
England  the  Puritans,  in  France  the  Libertines ; — how 
then  can  you  be  so  obstinate,  and  continue  thus  apart 
from  the  rest  of  the  world,  as  did  the  Luciferians  and 
Donatists  ?  I  will  say  to  you,  as  S.  Augustine  said 
to  one  of  your  fellows :  *  "Be  good  enough,  I  beseech 
you,  to  enlighten  us  on  this  point; — how  it  can  be 
that  Our  Lord  has  lost  his  Church  throughout  the 
world,  and  has  began  to  have  none  save  in  you  alone." 
Surely  you  reduce  Our  Lord  to  too  great  a  poverty, 
says  S.  Jerome.t  But  if  you  say  your  church  was 
already  Catholic,  in  the  time  of  the  Apostle,  show  us 
that  it  existed  at  that  time,  for  all  the  sects  will  say 
the  same.  How  will  you  graft  this  little  scion  of 
pretended  religion  on  that  holy  and  ancient  stock  ? 
Make  your  church  touch  by  a  perpetual  continuation 
the  primitive  Church,  for  if  they  touch  not,  how  can 
the  one  draw  sap  from  the  other.  But  this  you  will 
never  do,  unless  you  submit  to  the  obedience  of  the 
Catholic  [Church],  you  will  never  be,  I  say,  with  those 
who  shall  sing  (Apoc.  v.  9)  :  Thou  hast  redeemed  us  in 
thy  Hood,  from  every  tribe  and  tongue,  and  people  and 
nation^  and  hast  made  us  a  kingdom  to  our  God. 
*  Contra  Don.  +  Contra  Lucif. 

ART.  III.  0.  XV.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  213 



Perhaps  you  will  say,  at  last,  that  after  a  time  your 
church  will  spread  its  wings,  and  will  become  Catholic 
by  process  of  time ;  but  this  is  talking  in  the  air. 
For  if  an  Augustine,  a  Chrysostom,  an  Ambrose,  a 
Cyprian,  a  Gregory,  and  that  great  multitude  of  excel- 
lent pastors,  have  not  been  able  to  manage  well  enough 
to  prevent  the  Church  from  tumbling  over  soon  after 
their  time,  how  [shall]  Calvin,  Luther,  and  the  rest 
[do  so]  ?  What  likelihood  is  there  that  it  should  grow 
stronger  now,  under  the  charge  of  your  ministers,  who 
neither  in  sanctity  nor  in  doctrine  are  comparable  with 
those  ?  If  the  Church  in  its  spring,  summer,  and 
autumn  has  not  been  fruitful,  how  would  you  have  one 
gather  fruits  from  it  in  winter  ?  If  in  its  youth  it 
has  made  no  progress,  how  far  would  you  have  it  run 
in  its  old  age  ? 

But  I  say  further ;  your  church  is  not  only  not 
Catholic,  but  never  has  been,  not  having  the  power  nor 
the  faculty  of  producing  children,  but  only  of  stealing 
the  offspring  of  others,  as  the  partridge  does.  And 
yet  it  is  certainly  one  of  the  properties  of  the  Church 
to  be  fertile  ;  it  is  for  that,  amongst  other  reasons,  that 
she  is  called  Dove.  And  if  her  Spouse,  when  he  would 
bless  a  man,  makes  his  wife  fruitful,  like  a  fruitful 
vine  on  the  sides  of  his  house  (Ps.  cxxvii.),  and  makes  the 
harren  woman  to  dwell  in  a  house,  the  joyful  mother  of 

2 1 4  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

many  cliildrcii  (Ps,  cxii.),  ought  he  not  himself  to  have 
a  bride  who  should  be  fruitful,  yea,  according  to  the 
holy  Word  (Is.  liv.),  this  desolate  one  should  have 
many  children,  this  new  Jerusalem  should  be  most 
populous,  and  have  a  great  generation.  The  Gentiles 
shall  tvalk  in  thy  light,  says  the  Prophet  (lb.  Ix.), 
and  Icings  in  the  glory  of  thy  rising.  Lift  up  thy  eyes 
round  about  and  see  ;  all  these  are  gathered  together,  they 
arc  come  to  thee :  thy  sons  shall  come  from  afar,  and  thy 
daughters  shall  rise  tip  at  thy  side :  and  (liii.) :  because 
his  soul  hath  laboured  .  .  .  therefore  will  I  distribute  to 
him  very  many.  Now  this  fertility  and  these  great 
nations  of  the  Church  come  principally  by  preaching, 
as  S.  Paul  says  ( i  Cor.  iv.  15):  In  the  Gospel  I  have 
begotten  you.  The  preacliing,  then,  of  the  Church  ought 
to  be  as  a  flame :  Thy  word  is  fiery,  0  Lord  (Ps. 
cxviii.  140).  And  what  is  more  active,  lively,  pene- 
trating, and  more  quick  to  alter  and  give  its  form  to 
other  matters  than  fire  ? 

Such  was  the  preaching  of  S.  Augustine  in  England, 
of  S.  Boniface  in  Germany,  of  S.  Patrick  in  Ireland, 
of  Willibrord  in  Frisia,  of  Cyril  in  Bohemia,  of  Adalbert 
in  Poland,  of  Stephen  in  Hungary,  of  S.  Vincent  Ferrer 
and  John  Capistran ;  such  the  preaching  of  *  ...  . 
Francis  Xavier,  and  a  thousand  others,  who  have  over- 
turned idolatry  by  holy  preaching  ;  and  all  were  Eoman 

On  the  contrary,  your  ministers  have  not  yet  con- 
verted any  province  from  paganism,  nor  any  country. 
To  divide  Christendom,  to  create  factions  there,  to  tear 

*  There  are  four  or  five  words  here  in  the  MS.  which  we  fail  to  make 
out.  There  is  some  indication  of  the  names  of  (S.)  Louis  Bertrand, 
and  Anchieta,  the  others  appear  to  be  Henrye  and  Lorier.     [Tr.] 

ART.  III.  c.  XV.]         The  Rtile  of  Faith.  215 

in  pieces  the  robe  of  Our  Lord,  is  the  effect  of  their 
preachings.  Christian  doctrine  is  as  a  gentle  rain, 
which  makes  unfruitful  soil  to  bring  forth :  theirs 
rather  resembles  hail,  which  beats  down  and  destroys 
the  harvests,  and  makes  barren  the  most  fertile  lands. 
Take  notice  of  what  S.  Jude  says :  Woe,  to  them  who 
.  .  .  have  'perished  in  the  gainsaying  of  Gore  (Core  was 
a  schismatic) ;  these  are  spots  in  their  hanquets,  feasting 
together  luithodt  fear,  feeding  themselves,  clouds  ivithout 
water  which  are  carried  cd)out  hy  the  loind : — they  have 
the  exterior  of  the  Scriptures,  but  they  have  not  the 
interior  moisture  of  the  Spirit : — nnfrnitfiil  trees  of  the 
autumn, — which  have  not  the  leaves  of  the  letter  nor 
the  fruit  of  the  inner  meaning ;  twice  dead, — dead  to 
charity  by  schism,  and  to  faith  by  heresy ;  plucked  up 
hy  the  7'oo^s,  unable  any  more  to  bear  fruit; — raging 
waves  of  the  sea,  foaming  out  their  oion  confusion — of 
disputes,  contests  and  violent  changes ; — wandering 
stars, — which  can  serve  as  guides  to  no  one,  and  have 
no  firmness  of  faith  but  change  about  in  every  direction. 
What  wonder  then  that  your  preaching  is  sterile  ? 
You  have  but  the  bark  without  the  sap,  and  how 
would  you  have  it  germinate  ?  You  have  only  the 
sheath  without  the  sword,  the  letter  without  the  mean- 
ing; no  wonder  you  cannot  uproot  idolatry.  So  S. 
Paul,*  speaking  of  those  who  separate  from  the  Church, 
protests  that  they  shall  advance  no  further.  If  then 
your  Church  can  m  no  way  style  itself  Catholic  up  to 
this  present,  still  less  can  you  hope  it  may  do  so  after- 
wards, since  its  preaching  is  so  feeble,  and  its  preachers 
have  never  undertaken,  as  Tertullian  says,t  the  busi- 
ness or  commission  "  of  converting  heathens,  but  only 

*  2  Tim.  iii.  9.  f  De  Prcesc.  xlii. 

2 1 6  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  h. 

of  perverting  our  own."  Oh  what  a  Church,  then, 
which  is  neither  one,  nor  holy,  nor  Catholic,  and,  which 
is  worse,  can  have  no  reasonable  hope  whatever  that 
it  will  ever  become  so. 



[This  title  is  at  the  top  of  a  blank  sheet,  but  the 
Saint  has  implicitly  treated  the  subject  in  what  has 
gone  before.  He  has  proved,  on  the  one  hand,  that 
the  Catholic  Church  takes  her  mission  and  her  doctrine 
from  the  Apostles,  on  the  other  hand  that  the  founders 
of  the  pretended  church  disclaim  Apostolic  mission 
and  succession,  reject  the  Sacrament  of  Orders,  despise 
that  priestly  Sacrifice  for  which  Orders  are  chiefly 
necessary,  and  not  only  contradict  specific  Apostolic 
utterances  but  reject  the  principle  of  Apostolic 
authority.      Tr.] 

ART.  IV.  c.  1.]  The  Rtde  of  Faith,  217 





We  will  begin  with  the  words  of  S.  Leo  :  *  ("  Although 
the  definition  of  the  Apostolic  See  in  matters  of  faith 
is  certain  and  irrefragable),  still  what  Our  Lord  had 
first  decided  by  our  ministry  he  irrefragably  confirmed 
by  the  assent  of  the  whole  brotherhood ;  so  that  he 
might  show  that  that  truly  proceeded  from  him  which, 
having  been  defined  by  the  first  of  all  the  Sees,  had 
been  received  by  the  judgment  of  the  whole  Christian 
world,  the  members  in  this  also  agreeing  with  their 
head.  .  .  .  And  truth  itself  appears  more  clearly 
and  is  held  more  firmly  when  examination  afterwards 
confirms  what  faith  had  first  taught,  (so  that  he  would 
indeed  be  an  impious  and  sacrilegious  man  who  should 
leave  anything  to  be  decided  by  his  own  opinion  after 
the  sentence  of  so  many  priests.") 

One  could  not  better  trace  out  a  true  and  holy 
Council  than  on  the  pattern  of  that  which  the  Apostles 
held  in  Jerusalem. 

Now  let  us  see  ( i .)  who  convoked  it ;  and  we  shall 
find  that  it  was  assembled  by  authority  itself,  by  the 
pastors :  The  Apostles  and  ancients  came  together  to 
consider  of  this  matter.\     And  in  truth  it  is  the  pastors 

*  Ep.  63.     We  do  uot  find  the  parts  placed  in  brackets.     [Tr.] 
t  Acts.  XV. 

2i8  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partil 

who  are  charged  to  instruct  the  people  and  to  provide 
for  their  salvation  by  resolving  the  doubts  which  arise 
touching  Christian  doctrine.  Emperors  and  princes 
ought  to  be  zealous  about  it,  but  according  to  their 
office,  which  is  after  the  manner  of  justice,  of  police, 
and  of  the,  sword  which  they  hear  not  in  vain*  Those 
therefore  who  will  have  that  the  Emperor  possessed 
this  authority  find  no  foundation  either  in  Scripture 
or  in  reason.  For  what  are  the  principal  causes  why 
General  Councils  are  assembled,  save  to  put  down  and 
cast  out  the  heretic,  the  schismatic,  the  scandalizer, 
as  wolves  from  the  sheep-fold  ? — as  that  first  Assembly 
was  held  in  Jerusalem  to  resist  those  who  belonged 
to  the  heresy  of  the  Pharisees.  And  who  has  the 
charge  of  driving  away  the  wolf  ?  And  who  is  shep- 
herd save  he  to  whom  Our  Lord  said  :  Feed  my  sheep  ? 
Find  that  a  similar  charge  was  given  to  Tiberius. 
He  who  has  the  authority  for  feeding  the  sheep 
has  the  authority  for  calling  the  shepherds  together 
to  learn  what  pasturage  and  what  waters  are  whole- 
some for  the  flock.  This  is  properly  to  assemble  the 
pastors  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,t  that  is,  by 
the  authority  of  Our  Lord.  Eor  what  else  is  it  to 
assemble  the  estates  in  the  name  of  the  prince  but 
to  convoke  them  by  the  authority  of  the  prince  ? 
And  who  has  received  this  autliority  except  him  who 
as  lieutenant  has  received  the  Keys  of  the  Kingdom 
of  Heaven  ?  This  made  the  good  Father,  Bishop 
Lucentius,  legate  of  the  holy  Apostolic  See,  say  that 
Dioscorus  had  done  greatly  wrong  in  having  assembled 
a  council  without  Apostolic  authority.  "  Having 
dared,"  said  he,   "  to    convoke   a   synod  without  the 

*  Rom.  xiii.  4.  f  Matt,  xviii.  20. 

ART.  IV.  c.  I.]  The  Rtile  of  Faith.  2 1 9 

authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  a  thing  which  had 
never  been  nor  could  be  lawfully  done :  "  and  he  said 
these  words  in  the  full  assembly  of  the  great  Council 
of  Chalcedon. 

Still  it  is  necessary  that  if  the  town  where  the 
meeting  is  held  be  subject  to  the  Emperor  or  to  some 
prince,  and  a  public  collection  has  to  be  made  for  the 
expenses  of  a  Council,  the  prince  in  whose  terri- 
tory they  meet  should  have  permitted  and  authorised 
the  meeting,  and  the  collections  must  be  authorised 
by  the  princes  in  whose  States  they  are  made.  And 
when  the  Emperor  wishes  to  assemble  a  Council  [he 
may  do  so],  provided  that  the  Holy  See,  consenting 
thereto,  makes  the  convocation  legitimate.  Such  have 
been  the  convocations  of  some  most  authentic  Councils, 
and  such  was  that  which  Herod  ordered  at  Jerusalem 
to  know  when  the  Christ  should  be  born,  the  priests 
and  scribes  consenting.  But  to  go  on  thence  to 
attribute  to  princes  the  right  to  command  the  con- 
vocation of  a  Council  would  be  as  unreasonable  as  to 
draw  an  argument  from  his  cruelty  to  S.  John  the 
Baptist,  or  his  massacre  of  the  infants. 

We  next  (2.)  come  to  examine  in  this  first  Chris- 
tian Council  which  was  held  by  the  Apostles,  who 
they  were  that  were  called  :  The  Apostles  and  ancients, 
says  the  text,  came  together  to  consider  of  this  matter. 
The  Apostles  and  the  priests — in  a  word.  Churchmen. 
So  reason  required,  for  the  old  proverb  ever  holds 
good : — the  cobbler  not  beyond  his  last ;  as  does  the 
word  recorded  by  S.  Athanasius,*  which  the  good 
Father  Hosius  wrote  to  the  Emperor  Constantius : 
"  To  thee  God  has  committed  the  Empire,  to  us  what 

*  E'p.  ad  Solit. 

2  20  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

belongs  to  the  Church."  It  is  then  for  Ecclesiastics 
to  be  called,  although  princes,  the  Emperor,  kings 
and  others  find  a  place  as  protectors  of  the  Church. 

(3.)  Who  is  to  be  judge  ?  Now  we  do  not  see 
that  any  one  gave  judgment  except  four  of  the 
Apostles, — S.  Peter,  S.  Paul,  S.  Barnabas  and  S.  James, 
in  whose  sentence  every  one  acquiesced.  Whilst  they 
were  deliberating,  the  elders  or  priests  spoke,  as 
appears  probable  from  these  words :  "  And  when  there 
was  much  disputing"  which  shows  that  the  question 
was  most  earnestly  discussed.  But  when  it  came  to 
resolving  and  passing  sentence,  we  do  not  find  that 
any  one  speaks  who  is  not  an  Apostle  ;  as  we  find 
in  the  ancient  and  canonical  Councils  that  none  but 
Bishops  have  subscribed  and  defined.  Take  heed,  says 
S.  Paul,*  to  yourselves  and  to  all  the  flock  ;  but  who  is 
thus  to  take  heed  to  themselves  and  to  the  general 
body  ? — in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  placed  you  Bishops 
to  rule  the  Church  of  God  ?  It  belongs  to  the  pastors 
to  provide  wholesome  doctrine  for  the  sheep,  and  tliis 
was  the  reason  why  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon,  when  they  saw  monks  and  laymen  enter, 
cried  out  repeatedly :  "  Cast  out  those  who  are  not 
members ;  it  is  a  Council  of  Bishops." 

(4.)  If  we  consider  who  presided,  we  shall  find 
that  it  was  S.  Peter,  who  first  gives  sentence  and  is 
then  followed  by  the  rest,  as  S.  Jerome  says,  t  And 
indeed  he  had  the  chief  pastoral  charge :  Feed  my 
sheep, — and  he  was  the  grand  steward  over  the  rest : 
To  thee  I  will  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom ;  further, 
he  was  the  confirmer  of  the  brethren,  an  office  which 
properly  belongs  to  the  president  or  superintendent 

*  Acts  XX.  28,  t  ad  Aug. 

ART.  IV.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  221 

From  that  time,  therefore,  the  successor  of  S.  Peter, 
the  Bishop  of  Rome,  has  always  presided  at  Councils 
by  his  legates.  At  the  Council  of  Nice  the  first  who 
subscribed  are  Hosius,  Bishop,  Vitus,  and  Modestus, 
priests,  envoys  of  the  Holy  See.*  And,  in  truth, 
how  could  these  two  priests  have  come  to  subscribe 
before  the  Patriarchs  except  because  they  were  holding 
the  place  of  the  Supreme  Patriarch  ?  As  for  S. 
Athanasius,  so  far  from  his  having  presided,  he  did 
not  even  sit,  nor  subscribe,  being  at  that  time  only  a 
deacon.  And  the  great  Constantine  not  only  did  not 
preside,  but  sat  below  the  Bishops,  and  would  not  be 
there  as  pastor  but  as  a  sheep.t 

In  the  Council  of  Constantinople  though  he  was 
not  there  nor  any  legate  for  him, — because  he  was 
treating  the  same  matter  with  the  Western  Bishops 
at  Rome  which  was  being  treated  at  Constantinople 
by  the  Easterns,  who  were  thus  able  to  join  them 
only  in  spirit  and  deliberation, — still  by  letters  which 
were  mutually  exchanged  between  the  Fathers,  Dama- 
sus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  acknowledged  as  lawful  head 
and  president.;]; 

In  the  Council  of  Ephesus  S.  Cyril  presided  as 
legate  and  lieutenant  of  Pope  Celestine.  Here  are 
the  words  of  S.  Prosper  of  Aquitaine  \\  "By  this 
man  "  (he  is  speaking  of  Pope  Celestine)  "  the  Eastern 
Churches  also  were  purged  of  a  double  pestilence 
when  he  helped  Cyril,  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  a 
most  glorious  defender  of  the  Catholic  faith,  to  cut  off 
with  the  Apostolic  sword  the  Nestorian  impiety." 
Which  the  same  Prosper  says  again  in  the  Chronicle  : 

*  Prmf,  Cone.  Sard.  f  Theod.  i.  7.     Miifin.  x.  2, 

t  Theod.  V.  8,  10.  §  Contra  CoU. 

2  22  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

"  The  Nestorian  impiety  is  opposed  by  the  signal 
energy  of  Cyril,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  the  autho- 
rity of  Pope  Celestine." 

Throughout  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  everything 
proclaims  that  the  legates  of  the  Holy  See,  Paschasinus 
and  Lucentius,  presided.  One  has  but  to  read  the 

Here  then  you  have  Scripture,  reason,  and  the 
practice  of  the  four  most  legitimate  Councils  that  ever 
were,  presided  over  by  S.  Peter  and  his  successors 
when  they  were  present.  I  could  show  the  same  of 
all  the  others  which  have  been  received  in  the  uni- 
versal Church  as  legitimate.  But  this  will  quite 

(5.)  There  remain  the  approval,  acceptance,  and 
execution  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council,  which  were 
made,  as  they  ought  still  now  to  be  made,  by  all 
those  who  assisted.  Whence  it  was  said :  Tli&n  it 
'pleased  the  Apostles  and  ancients  with  the  whole  Church 
to  choose  men,  &c.  But  as  to  the  authority  in  virtue 
of  which  the  decree  of  that  Council  was  promulgated 
it  was  only  that  of  ecclesiastics :  The  Apostles  and 
ancients  .  .  .  to  those  .  .  .  that  are  at  Antioch  and  in 
Syria  and  Cilicia.  The  authority  of  the  sheep  is  not 
there  appealed  to,  but  only  that  of  the  shepherds. 
There  may  indeed  be  lay  persons  present  at  the 
Council  if  it  be  expedient,  but  not  sitting  as  judges 

ART.  IV.  0.  II.]  The  R^ile  of  Faith,  223 




We  are  speaking  then  here  of  a  Council  such  as  that, 
in  which  there  is  the  authority  of  S.  Peter,  both  in 
the  beginning  and  in  the  conclusion,  and  of  the  other 
Apostles  and  pastors  who  may  choose  to  assist,  or  if 
not  of  all  at  lettst  of  a  notable  part ;  in  which  dis- 
cussion is  free,  that  is,  in  which  any  one  who  chooses 
may  declare  his  mind  with  regard  to  the  question 
under  discussion ;  in  which  the  pastors  have  the 
judicial  voice.  Such,  in  fact,  as  those  four  first  were 
of  which  S.  Gregory  made  so  great  account  that  he 
made  this  protestation  concerning  them :  "  I  declare 
that  like  the  four  books  of  the  Holy  Gospel  do  I 
receive  and  venerate  the  four  Councils.*  Let  us  then 
consider  a  little  how  strong  their  authority  should  be 
over  the  understanding  of  Christians.  And  see  how 
the  Apostles  speak  of  them  :  It  has  seemed  good  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  to  us.  Therefore  the  authority  of 
councils  ought  to  be  revered  as  resting  on  the  action 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  if  against  that  Pharisaic 
heresy  the  Holy  Ghost,  doctor  and  guide  of  his  Church, 
assisted  the  assembly,  we  must  also  believe  that  on  all 
like  occasions  he  will  still  assist  the  meetings  of  pastors, 
to  regulate  by  their  mouth  both  our  actions  and 
our  beliefs.  It  is  the  same  Church,  as  dear  to  the 
heavenly  Spouse  as  she  was  then,  in  greater  need  than 
she  was  then, — what  reason  therefore  can  there  be 
why  he  should  not  give  her  the  same  assistance  as  he 

*  Ej;ust.  24. 

2  24  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  a 

gave  her  then  on  like  occasion  ?  Consider,  I  beg  you, 
the  importance  of  the  Gospel  words  :  And  if  he  will 
not  hear  the  Church,  let  him  he  to  thee  as  the  heathen 
and  the  jpnUican*  And  when  can  we  hear  the  Church 
more  distinctly  than  by  the  voice  of  a  general  Council, 
where  the  heads  of  the  Church  come  together  to  state 
and  resolve  difficulties  ?  The  body  speaks  not  by  its 
legs,  nor  by  its  hands,  but  only  by  its  head,  and  so, 
how  can  the  Church  better  pronounce  sentence  than 
by  its  heads  ?  But  Our  Lord  explains  himself : 
Again  I  say  to  you^  that  if  tioo  of  you  shall  agree  on 
earth  concerning  anything  whatsoever  they  shall  ask,  it 
shall  be  done  for  them  hy  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven.  .  .  . 
For  where  there  are  two  or  three  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them.  If  two  or 
three  being  gathered  together  in  the  name  of  Our 
Lord,  when  need  is,  have  so  particular  an  assistance 
from  him  that  he  is  in  the  midst  of  them  as  a  general 
in  the  midst  of  his  army,  as  a  doctor  and  regent 
among  his  disciples,  if  the  Father  infallibly  gives  them 
a  gracious  hearing  concerning  what  they  ask,  how 
would  he  refuse  his  Holy  Spirit  to  the  general 
assembly  of  the  pastors  of  the  Church  ? 

Again,  if  the  legitimate  assembly  of  the  pastors 
and  heads  of  the  Church  could  once  be  surprised  by 
error,  how  would  the  word  of  the  Master  be  verified : 
The  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it  if  How 
could  error  and  hellish  strength  more  triumphantly 
seize  upon  the  Church  than  by  having  subdued  doctors, 
pastors,  and  captains,  with  the  general  ?  And  this 
word  :  I  am  with  you  all  days  even  to  the  consummation 
of  the  world  :i — what  would  become  of  it  ?  And  how 
*  Matt,  xviii.  f  lb.  xvi.  i8.  t  lb.  xxviii.  ult. 

ART.  IV.  c.  II.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  225 

would  the  Church  be  tlu  'pillar  and  ground  of  truth ^' 
if  its  bases  and  foundations  support  error  and  false- 
hood ?  Doctors  and  pastors  are  the  visible  founda- 
tions of  the  Church,  on  whose  ministry  the  rest  is 

Finally,  what  stricter  command  have  we  than  to 
take  our  food  from  the  hand  of  our  pastors  ?  Does 
not  S.  Paul  say  that  the  Holy  Ghost  has  placed  them 
over  the  flock  to  rule  us,t  and  that  Our  Lord  has  given 
them  to  us  that  we  may  not  he  tossed  to  and  fro,  and 
carried  about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine !  |  What 
respect  then  must  we  not  pay  to  the  ordinances  and 
canons  which  emanate  from  their  general  assembly  ? 
It  is  true  that  taken  separately  their  teachings  are 
subject  to  correction,  but  when  they  are  together  and 
when  all  the  ecclesiastical  authority  is  collected  into 
one,  who  shall  dispute  the  sentence  which  comes 
forth  ?  If  the  salt  lose  its  savour,  wherewith  shall  it 
be  preserved  ?  If  the  chiefs  are  blind,  who  shall  lead 
the  others  ?  If  the  pillars  are  falling,  who  shall  hold 
them  up  ?  In  a  word,  what  has  the  Church  more  grand, 
more  certain,  more  solid,  for  the  overthrow  of  heresy, 
than  the  judgment  of  General  Councils  ?  The  Scrip- 
ture,— Beza  will  say.  But  I  have  already  shown  that 
"  heresy  is  of  the  understanding  not  of  the  Scripture, 
the  fault  lies  in  the  meaning,  not  in  the  words."  § 
Who  knows  not  how  many  passages  the  Arian  brought 
forward  ?  What  was  there  to  be  said  against  him 
except  that  he  understood  them  wrongly  ?  But  he  is 
quite  right  to  believe  that  it  is  you  who  interpret 
wrongly,  not  he,  you  that  are  mistaken,  not  he ;  that 

*  I  Tim.  iii.  15.  f  Acts  xx.  28.  X  Eph.  iv.  14. 

§  Hilar,  de  Trin.  ii 
III.  P 

2  26  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

his  appeal  to  the  analogy  of  the  faith  is  more  sound 
than  yours,  so  long  as  they  are  but  private  individuals 
who  oppose  his  novelties.  Yes,  if  one  deprive  the 
Councils  of  supreme  authority  in  decision  and  declara- 
tions necessary  for  the  understanding  of  the  Holy 
Word,  this  Holy  Word  will  be  as  much  profaned  as 
texts  of  Aristotle,  and  our  articles  of  religion  will  be 
subject  to  never-ending  revision,  and  from  being  safe 
and  steady  Christians  we  shall  become  wretched 

Athanasius  says  *  that  "  the  word  of  the  Lord  by 
the  Ecumenical  Council  of  Mce  remains  for  ever."  S. 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  speaking  of  the  ApoUinarists  who 
boasted  of  having  been  recognised  by  a  Catholic  coun- 
cil : — "  If  either  now,"  says  he,t  "  or  formerly,  they 
have  been  received,  let  them  prove  it  and  we  will 
agree,  for  it  will  be  clear  that  they  assent  to  the  right 
doctrine,  and  it  cannot  be  otherwise."  S.  Augustine 
says  \  that  the  celebrated  question  about  Baptism 
pressed  by  the  Donatists  made  some  Bishops  doubt, 
"  until  the  whole  world  in  plenary  council  formulated 
beyond  all  doubt  what  was  most  wholesomely  believed." 
"  The  decision  of  the  priestly  Council  (of  Nice),"  says 
Eufinus  (i.),  "  is  conveyed  to  Constantine.  He  venerates 
it  as  settled  by  God,  in  such  sense  that  if  any  one 
were  to  oppose  it  he  would  be  working  his  own  de- 
struction, as  opposing  himself  to  God."  But  if  any  one 
supposes  that  because  he  can  produce  analogies,  texts 
of  Scripture,  Greek  and  Hebrew  words,  he  is  therefore 
allowed  to  make  doubtful  again  what  has  already  been 
determined  by  General  Councils,  he  must  bring  patents 
from  heaven  duly  signed  and  sealed,  or  else  he  must 

*  ad  Ejpisc.  Afric.        f  ad  Chelid.        +  de  Bap.  Contra  Don.  i. 

ART.  IV.  c.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  227 

admit  that  anybody  else  may  do  as  he  does,  that 
everything  is  at  the  mercy  of  our  rash  speculations, 
that  everything  is  uncertain  and  subject  to  the  variety 
of  the  judgments  and  considerations  of  men.  The 
Wise  Man  gives  us  other  counsel : '"''  The  words  of  the 
wise  are  as  goads,  and  as  nails  deeply  fastened  in,  which 
by  the  counsel  of  masters  are  given  from  one  shepherd. 
More  than  these,  my  son,  require  not. 



Now,  will  you  remain  asleep  during  this  shock  which 
your  masters  have  given  to  the  Church  ?  Consider 
with  yourselves,  I  pray  you.  Luther  in  the  book 
which  he  has  composed  on  the  Councils  is  not  content 
with  tearing  down  the  stones  that  are  visible,  but  goes 
so  far  as  to  sap  the  very  foundations  of  the  Church. 
Who  would  credit  this  of  Luther,  that  great  and 
glorious  reformer,  as  Beza  calls  him  ?  How  does  he 
treat  the  great  Council  of  Nice  ?  Because  the  Council 
forbids  those  who  have  mutilated  themselves  to  be 
received  into  the  clerical  ministry,  and  presently  again 
forbids  ecclesiastics  to  keep  in  their  houses  other 
women  besides  their  mothers  or  their  sisters : — 
"  Pressed  on  this  point/'  says  Luther,  "  I  do  not  allow 
[the  presence  of]  the  Holy  Spirit  in  this  Council.  And 
*  Eccles.  xii.  ii,  I2. 

2  28  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partil 

why  ?  An  debebit  episcopus  aut  concionator  ilium 
intolerabilem  ardorem  et  sestum  amoris  illiciti  sustinere, 
et  neque  conjugio  neque  castratione  se  ab  his  periculis 
liberare  ?  Is  there  no  other  work  for  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  do  in  Councils  than  to  bind  and  burden  his  ministers 
by  making  impossible,  dangerous,  unnecessary  laws  ?  " 
He  makes  exception  for  no  Council,  but  seriously 
holds  that  the  GuH  alone  can  do  as  much  as  a  Council. 
Such  is  the  opinion  of  this  great  reformer. 

But  what  need  have  I  to  go  far  ?  Beza  says  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  King  of  France,  that  your  reform  will 
refuse  the  authority  of  no  Council;  so  far  he  speaks 
well,  but  what  follows  spoils  all :  "  provided/'  says  he, 
"  that  the  Word  of  God  test  it." 

But,  for  God's  sake,  when  will  they  cease  darkening 
the  question !  The  Councils,  after  the  fullest  consul- 
tation, when  the  test  has  been  made  by  the  holy 
touchstone  of  the  Word  of  God,  decide  and  define 
some  article.  If  after  all  this  another  test  has  to  be 
tried  before  their  determination  is  received,  will  not 
another  also  be  wanted  ?  Who  will  not  want  to 
apply  his  test,  and  whenever  will  the  matter  be  settled  ? 
After  the  test  has  been  applied  by  the  Council,  Beza 
and  his  disciples  want  to  try  again  ?  And  who  shall 
stop  another  from  asking  as  much,  in  order  to  see  if 
the  Council's  test  has  been  properly  tried  ?  And  why 
not  a  third  to  know  if  the  second  is  faithful  ? — and 
then  a  fourth,  to  test  the  third  ?  Everything  must  be 
done  over  again,  and  posterity  will  never  trust  anti- 
quity but  will  go  ever  turning  upside  down  the 
holiest  articles  of  the  faith  in  the  wheel  of  their 

We   are  not  hesitating  as   to  whether  we  should 

ABT.  IV.  c.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  229 

receive  a  doctrine  at  haphazard,  or  should  test  it  by 
the  application  of  God's  A¥ord.  But  what  we  say  is 
that  when  a  Council  has  applied  this  test,  our  brains 
have  not  now  to  revise  but  to  believe.  Once  let  the 
canons  of  Councils  be  submitted  to  the  test  of  private 
individuals, — as  many  persons,  so  many  tastes,  so 
many  opinions. 

The  article  of  the  real  presence  of  Our  Lord  in  the 
most  Holy  Sacrament  had  been  received  under  the  test 
of  many  Councils.  Luther  wished  to  make  another 
trial,  Zwingle  another  trial  on  that  of  Luther,  Brentius 
another  on  these,  Calvin  another, — as  many  tests  so 
many  opinions.  But,  I  beseech  you,  if  the  test  aS' 
applied  by  a  General  Council  be  not  enough  to  settle 
the  minds  of  men,  how  shall  the  authority  of  some 
nobody  be  able  to  do  it  ?  That  is  too  great  an 

Some  of  the  most  learned  ministers  of  Lausanne, 
these  late  years.  Scripture  and  analogy  of  faith  in  hand, 
oppose  the  doctrine  of  Calvin  concerning  justification. 
To  bear  the  attack  of  their  arguments  no  new  reasons 
appear,  though  some  wretched  little  tracts,  insipid  and 
void  of  doctrine,  are  set  a-going.  How  are  these  men 
treated  ?  They  are  persecuted,  driven  away,  threatened. 
Why  is  this  ?  "  Because  they  teach  a  doctrine  con- 
trary to  the  profession  of  faith  of  our  Church." 
Gracious  heavens  !  the  doctrine  of  the  Council  of  Mce, 
after  an  approbation  of  thirteen  hundred  years,  is  to  be 
submitted  to  the  tests  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and  Beza,  and 
there  shall  be  no  trial  made  of  the  Calvinistic  doctrine, 
quite  new,  entirely  doubtful,  patched  up  and  incon- 
sistent !  Why,  at  least,  may  not  each  one  try  it  for 
himself  ?      If  that  of  Nice  has  not  been  able  to  quiet 

230  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

your  brains,  why  would  you,  by  your  statements 
impose  quiet  on  the  brains  of  your  companions,  who 
are  as  good  as  you,  as  wise  and  as  consistent  ?  Behold 
the  iniquitousness  of  these  judges ;  to  give  liberty  to 
their  own  opinions  they  lower  the  ancient  Councils, 
while  with  their  own  opinions  they  would  bridle  those 
of  others.  They  seek  their  own  glory,  be  sure  of  that ; 
and  just  as  much  as  they  take  away  from  the  Ancients 
do  they  attribute  to  themselves. 

Beza  in  the  Epistle  to  the  King  of  France  and  in  the 
fore-mentioned  Treatise,  says  that  the  Council  of  Nice 
was  a  true  Council  if  ever  there  was  one.  He  says 
the  truth,  never  did  good  Christian  doubt  about  it,  nor 
about  the  other  first  three ;  but  if  it  be  such,  why 
does  Calvin  call  that  sentence  in  the  Symbol  of  the 
Council — Deum  de  Deo  lumen  de  lumine — hard  ?  And 
how  is  it  that  that  word  o/noovacov  (consuhstantialem) 
was  so  offensive  to  Luther — "  My  soul  hates  this  word 
homoousion ; "  a  word,  however,  which  so  entirely 
approved  itself  to  that  great  Council  ?  How  is  it  you 
do  not  maintain  the  reality  of  the  body  of  Our  Lord  in 
the  holy  Sacrament,  that  you  call  superstition  the 
most  holy  sacrifice  of  the  same  precious  body  of  Our 
Saviour  which  is  offered  by  the  priests,  and  that  you 
will  make  no  difference  between  the  bishop  and  the 
priest, — since  all  this  is  so  expressly  not  defined  but 
presupposed,  there,  as  perfectly  well  known  in  the 
Church  ?  Never  would  Luther,  or  Peter  Martyr,  or 
Ochin  have  been  ministers  of  yours,  if  they  had 
remembered  the  acts  of  the  great  Council  of  Chalcedon  ; 
for  it  is  most  expressly  forbidden  there  for  religious 
men  and  women  to  marry. 

Oh  how  good  it  would  have  been  to  see  the  round 

AET.  IV.  c.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  231 

of  this  your  lake  if  this  Council  of  Chalcedon  had 
been  held  in  reverence  !  Oh  how  often  would  your 
ministers  have  kept  silence,  and  most  rightfully, — for 
there  is  there  an  express  command  to  laymen  by  no 
means  to  lay  hands  upon  the  goods  of  Ecclesiastics, 
to  everybody  to  join  in  no  revolt  against  the  bishop, 
and  neither  to  act  nor  to  speak  contumeliously  against 
the  ministers  of  the  Church.  The  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople attributes  the  primacy  to  the  Pope  of 
Eome,  and  presupposes  this  as  a  thing  of  universal 
knowledge ;  so  does  that  of  Chalcedon.  But  is  there 
any  article  in  which  we  differ  from  you,  which  has 
not  been  several  times  condemned  either  in  holy 
General  Councils,  or  in  particular  ones  received  gene- 
rally ?  And  yet  your  ministers  have  resuscitated 
them,  without  shame,  without  scruple,  not  otherwise 
than  though  they  were  certain  holy  deposits  and 
treasures  hidden  to  Antiquity,  or  by  Antiquity  most 
curiously  locked  up  in  order  that  we  might  have  the 
benefit  of  them  in  this  age. 

I  am  well  aware  that  in  the  Councils  there  are 
articles  concerning  Ecclesiastical  order  and  discipline, 
which  can  be  changed  and  are  but  temporary.  But 
it  is  not  for  private  persons  to  interfere  with  them  ;  the 
same  authority  which  drew  them  up  is  required  for 
abrogating  them ;  if  anybody  else  tries  to  do  so  it  is  in 
vain,  and  the  authority  is  not  the  same  unless  it  is  a 
Council,  or  the  general  Head,  or  the  custom  of  the 
whole  Church.  As  to  decrees  on  doctrines  of  faith 
they  are  invariable;  what  is  once  true  is  so  unto 
eternity ;  and  the  Councils  call  canons  (that  is,  rules) 
what  they  determine  in  this,  because  they  are  inviol- 
able rules  for  our  faith. 

232  The  Catholic  Co7itr over sy.  [pabth. 

But  all  this  is  to  be  understood  of  true  Councils, 
either  general  or  provincial,  approved  by  General  Coun- 
cils or  the  Apostolic  See.  Such  as  was  not  that  of 
the  four  hundred  prophets  assembled  by  Achab :  *  for 
it  was  neither  general,  since  those  of  Juda  were  not 
called  to  it,  nor  duly  assembled,  for  it  had  no  priestly 
authority.  And  those  prophets  were  not  legitimate 
or  acknowledged  as  such  by  Josaphat,  King  of  Juda, 
when  he  said :  Is  there  not  here  some  prophet  of  the 
Lord  that  we  may  inquire  hy  him  ? — as  if  he  would 
say  that  the  others  were  not  prophets  of  the  Lord. 
Such,  again,  was  not  the  assembly  of  the  priests 
against  Our  Lord ;  which  was  so  far  from  having 
warrant  in  Scripture  for  the  assistance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  that  on  the  contrary  it  had  been  declared  a 
private  one  by  the  Prophets ;  and  truly  right  reason 
required  that  when  the  King  was  present  his  lieu- 
tenants should  lose  authority,  and  that  the  High 
Priest  being  present  the  dignity  of  the  vicar  should 
be  reduced  to  the  condition  of  the  rest.  Besides,  it 
had  not  the  form  of  a  Council ;  it  was  a  tumultuous 
meeting,  wanting  in  the  requisite  order,  without  autho- 
rity from  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  who  was 
Our  Lord,  there  present  with  a  visible  presence,  whom 
they  were  bound  to  acknowledge.  In  truth,  when 
the  great  sacrificer  is  visibly  present,  the  vicar  cannot 
be  called  chief;  when  the  governor  of  a  fortress  is 
present,  it  is  for  him,  not  for  his  lieutenant,  to  give 
the  word.  Besides  all  this,  the  synagogue  was  to  be 
changed  and  transferred  at  that  time,  and  this  its 
crime  had  been  predicted.  But  the  Catholic  Church 
is  never  to  be  transferred,  so  long  as  the  world  shall 

*  3  Kings  xxii.  6. 

ART.  IV.  0.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  233 

be  world  ;  we  are  not  waiting  for  any  third  legislator, 
nor  any  other  priesthood  ;  but  she  is  to  be  eternal. 
And  yet  Our  Lord  did  this  honour  to  the  sacrificial 
dignity  of  Aaron  that  in  spite  of  all  the  bad  intention 
of  those  who  held  it  the  High  Priest  prophesied  and 
uttered  a  most  certain  judgment  {that  it  is  expedient 
one  man  should  die  for  the  people,  and  the  whole  nation 
perish  not)*,  which  he  spoke  not  of  himself  and  by 
chance,  but  he  projyhesied,  says  the  Evangelist,  heing 
the  High  Priest  of  that  year. 

Thus  Our  Lord  would  conduct  the  Synagogue  and 
the  priestly  authority  with  singular  honour  to  its 
tomb,  when  he  made  it  give  place  to  the  Catholic 
Church  and  the  Evangelic  priesthood :  and  then  when 
the  Synagogue  came  to  an  end  (which  was  in  the 
resolution  to  put  Our  Lord  to  death),  the  Church  was 
founded  in  that  very  death :  /  have  finished  the  work 
which  thou  gavest  me  to  do,f  said  Our  Lord  after  the 
Supper.  And  in  the  Supper  Our  Lord  had  instituted 
the  New  Testament ;  so  that  the  Old,  with  its  cere- 
monies and  its  priesthood,  lost  its  force  and  its  privi- 
leges, though  the  confirmation  of  the  New  was  only 
made  by  the  death  of  the  testator,  as  S.  Paul  says.  J 
We  must  then  no  longer  take  account  of  the  privileges 
of  the  Synagogue,  as  they  were  founded  on  a  Testa- 
ment which  became  old,  and  was  abrogated  when  they 
said  these  cruel  words :  Crucify  him,  or  those  others, 
blaspheming :  What  further  need  have  we  of  witnesses  ? 
For  this  was  that  very  dashing  against  the  stumbling- 
stone,  according  to  the  ancient  predictions. 

My  intention  has  been  to  destroy  the  force  of  the 
two  objections  which  are  raised  against  the  infallible 

*  John  xi.  50,  51.  +  John  xvii.  4.  +  Heb.  ix. 

2  34  ^-^^  Catholic  Controversy.  [pabth. 

authority  of  Councils  and  of  the  Church,  the  others 
will  be  answered  in  our  treatment  of  particular  points 
of  Catholic  doctrine.  There  is  nothing  so  certain  but 
that  it  can  meet  with  opposition,  but  truth  remains 
firm  and  is  glorified  by  the  assaults  of  what  is  con- 
trary to  it. 




Theodosius  the  Elder  found  no  better  way  of  putting 
down  the  disputes  of  his  time  concerning  religious 
matters  than  to  follow  the  counsel  of  Sisinnius, — to 
bring  together  the  chiefs  of  the  sects,  and  ask  them  if 
they  held  the  ancient  Fathers,  who  had  had  charge  of 
the  Church  before  all  these  disputes  began,  to  be 
honest,  holy,  good.  Catholic  and  Apostolic  men.  To 
which  the  sectaries  answering,  yes ;  he  replied :  Let 
us  then  examine  your  doctrine  by  theirs ;  if  yours  is 
conformable  to  it  let  us  retain  it,  otherwise  let  us  give 
it  up.*  There  is  no  better  plan  in  the  world.  Since 
Calvin  and  Beza  own  that  the  Church  continued  pure 
for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  let  us  see  whether  your 
Church  is  in  the  same  faith  and  the  same  doctrine. 

*  Sozom.  vii.  12.  The  Saint,  in  a  marginal  note,  says  that  this 
passage  is  to  be  put  at  the  beginning  of  the  following  chapter ;  but 
as,  unfortunately,  no  following  chapter  is  extant,  we  retain  the  passage 
here.    [Tr.] 

ART.  V.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  235 

And  who  can  better  witness  to  us  the  faith  which  the 
Church  followed  in  those  ancient  times,  than  they 
who  then  lived  with  her,  at  her  table  ?  Who  can 
better  describe  to  us  the  manners  of  this  heavenly 
Spouse,  in  the  flower  of  her  age,  than  those  who  have 
had  the  honour  of  holding  the  principal  offices  about 
her  ?  And  in  this  aspect  the  Fathers  deserve  that  we 
yield  them  our  faith,  not  on  account  of  the  exquisite 
doctrine  with  which  they  were  furnished,  but  for  the 
uprightness  of  their  consciences,  and  the  fidelity  with 
which  they  acted  in  their  charges. 

One  does  not  so  much  require  knowledge  in  wit- 
nesses as  honesty  and  good  faith.  We  do  not  want 
them  here  as  authors  of  our  faith,  but  as  witnesses  of 
the  belief  in  which  the  Church  of  their  time  lived. 
No  one  can  give  more  conclusive  evidence  than  those 
who  ruled  it :  they  are  beyond  reproach  in  every 
respect.  He  who  would  know  what  path  the  Church 
followed  at  that  time,  let  him  ask  those  who  have 
most  faithfully  accompanied  her.  The  wise  man  %oil\ 
seek  out  the  wisdom  of  all  the  ancients,  and  ivill  he  occu- 
pied in  the  prophets.  He  will  keep  the  sayings  of 
renowned  men  (Ecclus.  xxxix.  i,  2).  Hear  what  Jere- 
mias  says  (vi.  1 6) :  Thus  saith  the  Lord :  stand  ye  on 
the  ways  and  see,  and  ask  for  the  old  paths,  which  is 
the  good  way,  and  walk  ye  in  it ;  and  you  shall  find 
refreshment  for  your  soids.  And  the  Wise  Man  (Ec- 
clus. viii.  11):  Let  not  the  discoiorse  of  the  ancients 
escape  thee,  for  they  have  learned  of  their  fathers.  And 
we  must  not  only  honour  their  testimonies  as  most 
assured  and  irreproachable ;  but  also  give  great  credit 
to  their  doctrine,  beyond  all  our  inventions  and  curious 
searchings.     We  are  not  in  any  doubt  as  to  whether 

236  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  n. 

the  ancient  Fathers  should  be  held  as  authors  of  our 
faith;  we  know,  better  than  all  your  ministers  do, 
that  they  are  not.  Nor  are  we  disputing  whether  we 
must  receive  as  certain,  that  which  one  or  two  of  the 
Fathers  may  have  held  as  opinions.  Our  difference  is 
in  this :  You  say  you  have  reformed  your  church  on 
the  pattern  of  the  ancient  Church ;  we  deny  it,  and 
take  to  witness  those  who  have  seen  it,  who  have 
guarded  it,  who  have  governed  it: — is  not  this  a 
straightforward  proof,  and  one  clear  of  all  quibbling  ? 
Here  we  are  only  maintaining  the  integrity  and  good 
faith  of  the  witnesses.  Besides  this  you  say  that  your 
Church  has  been  cut,*  and  reformed  according  to  the 
true  understanding  of  the  Scriptures ;  we  deny  it,  and 
say  that  the  ancient  Fathers  had  more  competence  and 
learning  than  you,  and  yet  judged  that  the  meaning 
of  the  Scriptures  was  not  such  as  you  make  out.  Is 
not  this  a  most  certain  proof  ?  You  say  that  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures  the  Mass  ought  to  be  abolished ; 
all  the  ancient  Fathers  deny  it.  Whom  shall  we 
believe — this  troop  of  ancient  Bishops  and  Martyrs,  or 
this  band  of  new-comers  ?  That  is  where  we  stand. 
Now  who  does  not  see  at  first  sight,  that  it  is  an  un- 
bearable impudence  to  refuse  belief  to  these  myriad 
Martyrs,  Confessors,  Doctors,  who  have  preceded  us  ? 
And  if  the  faith  of  that  ancient  Church  ouo^ht  to  serve 
as  a  rule  of  right-believing,  we  cannot  better  find  this 
rule  than  in  the  writings  and  depositions  of  these  our 
most  holy  and  distinguished  ancestors. 

*  Here  follows  a  passage  marked  as  if  to  be  left  out :  "  by  the  rule 
and  compass  of  the  Scripture ;  we  deny  it,  and  say  that  you  have 
shortened,  narrowed,  and  bent  this  rule,  as  formerly  did  those  of 
Lesbos,  to  accommodate  it  to  your  notions.     And  .  .  ."     [Tr.] 

ART.  VI.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  237 





When  Our  Lord  imposes  a  name  upon  men  he  always 
bestows  some  particular  grace  according  to  the  name 
which  he  gives  them.  If  he  changes  the  name  of  that 
great  father  of  believers,  and  of  Abram  makes  him 
Abraham,  also  of  a  high  father  he  makes  him  father  of 
many,  giving  the  reason  at  the  same  time :  Thou  shalt 
he  called  Abraham  ;  hecaiise  I  have  made  thee  the  father 
of  many  nations*  And  changing  that  of  Sarai  into  Sara, 
of  lady  that  she  was  in  Abraham's  house,  he  makes  her 
lady  of  the  nations  and  peoples  who  were  to  be  born 
of  her.  If  he  changes  Jacob  into  Israel,  the  reason  is 
immediately  given :  For  if  thou  hast  been  poiverftd 
against  God,  how  much  more  shalt  thou  prevail  against 
men.'f  So  that  God  by  the  names  which  he  imposes 
not  only  marks  the  things  named,  but  teaches  us 
something  of  their  qualities  and  conditions.  Witness 
the  angels,  who  have  names  only  according  to  their 
offices,  and  S.  John  Baptist,  who  has  the  grace  in  his 
name  which  he  announced  in  his  preaching ;  as  is 
customary  in  that  holy  language  of  the  Israelites. 
The  imposition  of  the  name  in  the  case  of  S.  Peter  is 

*  Gen.  xvii.  5.  t  lb.  xxxii.  28. 

238  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

no  small  argument  of  the  particular  excellence  of  his 
charge,  according  to  the  very  reason  which  Our  Lord 
appended :   Thou  art  Peter,  &c. 

But  what  name  does  he  give  him  ?  A  name  full  of 
majesty,  not  common,  not  trivial,  but  one  expressive 
of  superiority  and  authority,  like  unto  that  of  Abraham 
himself.  For  if  Abraham  was  thus  called  because  he 
was  to  be  father  of  many  nations,  S.  Peter  has  received 
this  name  because  upon  him  as  upon  a  firm  rock  was 
to  be  founded  the  multitude  of  Christians.  And  it  is 
on  account  of  this  resem,blance  that  S.  Bernard  ^''"  calls 
the  dignity  of  Peter  "  patriarchate  of  Abraham." 

When  Isaias  would  exhort  the  Jews  by  the  example 
of  Abraham,  the  stock  from  which  they  sprang,  he 
calls  Abraham  Peter :  Look  unto  Abraham,  unto  the 
rock  (^petrarri)  whence  you  are  hewn ;  .  .  .  .  look  unto 
Abraham  your  father  ;\  where  he  shows  that  this 
name  of  rock  very  properly  refers  to  paternal  authority. 
This  name  is  one  of  Our  Lord's  names ;  for  what  name 
do  we  find  more  frequently  attributed  to  the  Messias 
than  that  of  rock  ?  |  This  changing  and  imposition 
of  name  is  then  very  worthy  of  consideration.  For 
the  names  that  God  gives  are  full  of  power  and  might. 
He  communicates  Peter's  name  to  him;  he  has  there- 
fore communicated  to  him  some  quality  corresponding 
with  the  name.  Our  Lord  himself  is  by  excellence 
called  the  rock,  because  he  is  the  foundation  of  the 
Church,  and  the  corner-stone,  the  support,  and  the 
firmness,  of  this  spiritual  edifice :  and  he  has  declared 
that  on  S.  Peter  should  his  Church  be  built,  and  that 
he   would    establish   him   in   tlie   faith :    Confirm   thy 

*  de  Consi/I.  n.  f  H.  i,  2, 

X  Eph.  ii.  20 ;  Ps.  cxvii.  2i  ;  i  Cor.  x.  4. 

ART.  VI.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  239 

hrethren*  I  am  well  aware  that  he  imposed  a  name 
upon  the  two  brothers  John  and  James,  Boanerges,  the 
sons  of  thunder ;  f  but  this  name  is  not  one  of  supe- 
riority or  command,  but  rather  of  obedience,  nor  proper 
or  special  but  common  to  two,  nor,  apparently,  was  it 
permanent,  since  they  have  never  since  been  called  by 
it :  it  was  rather  a  title  of  honour,  on  account  of  the 
excellence  of  their  preaching.  But  in  the  case  of  S. 
Peter  he  gives  a  name  permanent,  full  of  authority, 
and  so  peculiar  to  him  that  we  may  well  say  :  to  which 
of  the  others  hath  he  said  at  any  time.  Thou  art  Peter  ? 
— showing  that  S.  Peter  was  superior  to  the  others. 

But  I  will  remind  you  that  Our  Lord  did  not  change 
S.  Peter's  name,  but  only  added  a  new  name  to  his 
old  one,  perhaps  in  order  that  he  might  remember  in 
his  authority  what  he  had  been,  what  his  stock  was, 
and  that  the  majesty  of  the  second  name  might  be 
tempered  by  the  humility  of  the  first,  and  that  if  the 
name  of  Peter  made  us  recognise  him  as  chief,  the 
name  of  Simon  might  tell  us  that  he  was  not  absolute 
chief,  but  obeying  and  subaltern  chief,  and  head-servant. 
S.  Basil  seems  to  have  given  support  to  what  I  am 
saying,  when  he  said :  J  "  Peter  denied  thrice  and  was 
placed  in  the  foundation.  Peter  had  previously  not 
denied,  and  had  been  pronounced  blessed.  He  had 
said  :  Thoio  art  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  and  thereupon 
had  heard  that  he  was  Peter.  The  Lord  thus  returned 
his  praise,  because  although  he  was  a  rock,  yet  he  was 
not  the  rock ;  for  Christ  is  truly  the  immovable  rock, 
but  Peter  on  account  of  the  rock.  Christ  indeed  crives 
his  own  prerogative  to  others,  yet  he  gives  them  not 
losing  them  himself,  he  holds  them  none  the  less.     He 

*  Luke  xxii.  32.        +  Mark  iii.  17.         J  Horn,  dc  Pcenit.  4. 

240  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

is  a  rock,  and  he  made  a  rock ;  what  is  his,  he  com- 
municates to  his  servants ;  this  is  the  proof  of  opulence, 
namely,  to  have  and  to  give  to  others."  Thus  speaks 
S.  Basil.* 

What  does  he  [Christ]  say  ?  three  things ;  but  we 
must  consider  them  one  after  the  other  :  Thoit  art 
Peter  ;  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church ;  and 
the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it  :'\'  he  says 
that  Peter  was  a  stone  or  rock,  and  that  on  this  rock 
or  this  stone  he  would  build  his  Church. 

But  here  we  are  in  a  difficulty :  for  it  is  granted 
that  Our  Lord  has  spoken  to  S.  Peter,  and  of  S.  Peter 
as  far  as  this — and  upon  this  rock — but,  it  is  said  that 
in  these  words  he  no  longer  speaks  of  S.  Peter.  Now 
I  ask  you : — What  likelihood  is  there  that  Our  Lord 
would  have  made  this  grand  preface :  Blessed  art  thou 
Simon  Bar-jona ;  because  flesh  and  blood  hath  not 
revealed  it  to  thee,  but  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven: 
and  I  say  to  thee,  &c.,  in  order  to  say  no  more  than  : 
Thou  art  Peter, — and  then  suddenly  have  changed  his 
subject  and  gone  on  to  speak  of  something  else  ?  And 
again,  when  he  says  :  And  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
church, — do  you  not  see  that  he  evidently  speaks  of  the 
rock  of  which  he  had  previously  spoken  ?  and  of  what 
other  rock  had  he  spoken  but  Simon,  to  whom  he  had 
said  :  Thou  art  Peter  ?  But  this  is  the  ambiguity  which 
may  be  causing  hesitation  in  your  mind ;  you  perhaps 
think  that  as  Peter  is  now  the  proper  name  of  a  man, 
it  was  so  then,  and  that  so  we  transfer  the  signification 
of  Peter  to  rock  by  equivocation  of  masculine  and  femi- 
nine. But  we  do  not  equivocate  here ;  for  it  is  but 
one  same  word,  and  taken  in  the  same  sense,  when 

*  Here  there  is  an  hiatus  in  the  MS.     [Tr.]  +  Matt.  xvi. 

ART.  VI.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  241 

Our  Lord  said  to  Simon  :  Thou  art  Peter,  and  when  he 
said :  and  on  this  rock  I  ivill  hnild  my  church.  And 
this  name  of  Peter  was  not  a  proper  name  of  a  man, 
but  was  only  [then]  appropriated  to  Simon  Bar-jona. 
This  you  will  much  better  understand,  if  you  take  it 
in  the  language  in  which  Our  Lord  said  it;  he  spoke 
not  Latin  but  Syriac.  He  therefore  called  him  not 
Peter  but  Cephas,  thus :  Thoio  art  Cephas,  and  on  this 
Cephas  I  will  huild :  as  if  one  said  in  Latin  :  TJiou  art 
saxum,  and  on  this  saxum ;  or  in  French :  Thou  art 
rocher,  and  on  this  roclier  I  will  huild  my  church* 
Now  what  doubt  remains  that  it  is  the  same  person  of 
whom  he  says :  Thou  art  Rock,  and  of  whom  he  says : 
And  on  this  Rock  ?  Certainly  there  is  no  other  Cephas 
spoken  of  in  all  this  chapter  but  Simon.  On  what 
ground  then  do  we  come  to  refer  this  relative  hanc 
to  another  Cephas  besides  the  one  who  immediately 
precedes  ? 

You  will  say : — Yes,  but  the  Latin  says  :  Thou  art 
Fctrus,  and  not :  Thou  art  Petra :  now  this  relative 
hanc,  which  is  feminine,  cannot  refer  to  Petrus,  which 
is  masculine.  The  Latin  version  indeed  has  other 
arofuments  enoueh  to  make  it  clear  that  this  stone  is 
no  other  than  S.  Peter,  and  therefore,  to  accommodate 
the  word  to  the  person  to  whom  it  was  given  as  a 
name,  who  was  masculine,  there  is  given  it  a  corre- 
sponding termination ;  as  the  Greek  does,  which  had 
put :  Thoti  art  Trer/jo?,  a7id  on  this  ry  irerpa.  But  it 
does  not  come  out  so  well  in  Latin  as  in  Greek, 
because  in  Latin  Petrus  does  not  mean  exactly  the 
same  as  petra,  but  in  Greek  irerpo'S  and  irerpa  is  the 
very  same  thing.  Similarly  in  French  rocher  and  roche 
*  Or  in  English :  Thou  a/rt  Rock,  and  on  this  Rock.    [Tr.] 

m.  Q 

242  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partil 

is  the  same  thing,  yet  still  so  that  if  I  had  to  predicate 
either  word  of  a  man,  I  would  rather  apply  to  him  the 
name  of  roclier  than  of  roche^  to  make  the  masculine 
word  correspond  with  the  masculine  subject.  I  have 
only  to  add,  on  this  interpretation,  that  nobody  doubts 
that  Our  Lord  called  S.  Peter  Cephas  (for  S.  John 
records  it  most  explicitly,  and  S.  Paul,  to  the  Gala- 
tians),  or  that  Cephas  means  a  stone  or  a  rock,  as  S. 
Jerome  says.* 

In  fine,  to  prove  to  you  that  it  is  really  S.  Peter  of 
whom  it  is  said :  And  on  this  rock, — I  bring  forward 
the  words  that  follow.  For  it  is  all  one  to  promise 
him  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  to  say  to 
him :  Upon  this  rock ;  now  we  cannot  doubt  that  it  is 
S.  Peter  to  whom  he  promises  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven,  since  he  says  clearly :  And  to  thee  will  I 
give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven :  if  therefore  we 
do  not  wish  to  disconnect  this  piece  of  the  Gospel  from 
the  preceding  and  the  following  words  in  order  to  place 
it  elsewhere  at  our  fancy,  we  cannot  believe  but  that 
all  this  is  said  to  S.  Peter  and  of  S.  Peter :  Thou  art 
Peter,  and  on  this  rock  I  will  'build  my  church.  And 
this  the  Catholic  Church,  when,  even  according  to 
the  admission  of  the  ministers,  she  was  true  and  pure, 
has  confessed  loudly  and  clearly  in  the  assembly  of 
630  Bishops  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedou.t 

Let  us  now  see  what  these  words  are  worth  and 
what  they  import,  (i.)  We  know  that  what  the  head 
is  to  a  living  body,  the  root  to  a  tree,  that  the  founda- 
tion is  to  a  building.  Our  Lord  then,  who  is  comparing 
his  Church  to  a  building,  when  he  says  that  he  will 
build  it  on  S.  Peter,  shows  that  S.  Peter  will  be  its 
*  In  Gal,  ii.  13.  t  Act  iii. 

ART.  VI.  c.  I.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  243 

foundation-stone,  the  root  of  this  precious  tree,  the 
head  of  this  excellent  body.  The  French  call  both  the 
building  and  the  family,  house,  on  this  principle,  that 
as  a  house  is  simply  a  collection  of  stones  and  other 
materials  arranged  with  order,  correspondence  and 
measure,  so  a  family  is  simply  a  collection  of  persons 
with  order  and  interdependence.  It  is  after  this  like- 
ness that  Our  Lord  calls  his  Church  a  building,  and 
when  he  makes  S.  Peter  its  foundation,  he  makes  him 
head  and  superior  of  this  family. 

(2.)  By  these  words  Our  Lord  shows  the  perpetuity 
and  immovableness  of  this  foundation.  The  stone  on 
which  one  raises  the  building  is  the  first,  the  others 
rest  on  it.  Other  stones  may  be  removed  without 
overthrowing  the  edifice,  but  he  who  takes  away  the 
foundation,  knocks  down  the  house.  If  then  the  gates 
of  hell  can  in  no  wise  prevail  against  the  Church,  they 
can  in  no  wise  prevail  against  its  foundation  and  head, 
which  they  cannot  take  away  and  overturn  without 
entirely  overturning  the  whole  edifice. 

He  shows  one  of  the  differences  there  are  between 
S.  Peter  and  himself.  For  Our  Lord  is  foundation  and 
founder,  foundation  and  builder ;  -  but  S.  Peter  is  only 
foundation.  Our  Lord  is  its  Master  and  Lord  in  per- 
petuity ;  S.  Peter  has  only  the  management  of  it,  as 
we  shall  explain  by  and  by. 

(3.)  By  these  words  Our  Lord  shows  that  the  stones 
which  are  not  placed  and  fixed  on  this  foundation 
are  not  in  the  Church,  and  form  no  part  thereof. 

244  ^^^  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  n. 



But  a  great  proof  of  the  contrary,  as  our  adversaries 
think,  is  that,  according  to  S.  Paul:  No  one  can  lay 
another  foundation  hut  that  which  is  laid :  which  is 
Christ  Jesus  ;  ^^  and  according  to  the  same  we  are  domes- 
tics of  God ;  huilt  upon  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles 
and  Prophets,  Jesus  himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone. \ 
And,  in  the  Apocalypse,|  the  wall  of  the  holy  city  had 
twelve  foundations,  and  in  these  twelve  foundations 
the  names  of  the  twelve  Apostles.  If  then,  say  they, 
all  the  twelve  Apostles  are  foundations  of  the  Church, 
how  do  you  attribute  this  title  to  S.  Peter  in  parti- 
cular ?  And  if  S.  Paul  says  that  no  one  can  lay 
another  foundation  than  Our  Lord,  how  do  you  dare 
to  say  that  by  these  words :  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on 
this  rock  I  will  luild  my  church,  S.  Peter  has  been 
established  as  foundation  of  the  Church  ?  Why  do 
you  not  rather  say,  asks  Calvin,  that  this  stone  on 
which  the  Church  is  founded  is  no  other  than  Our 
Lord  ?  Why  do  you  not  rather  declare,  says  Luther, 
that  it  is  the  confession  of  faith  whicli  Peter  had 
made  ? 

But  in  good  truth  it  is  an  ill  way  of  interpreting 
Scripture  to  overturn  one  passage  by  another,  or  to 
strain  it  by  a  forced  interpretation  to  a  strange  and 
unbecoming  sense.  We  must  leave  to  it  as  far  as 
possible  the  naturalness  and  sweetness  of  the  sense 
which  belongs  to  it. 

In  this  case,  then,  since  we  see  that  Scripture 
*  I  Cor.  iii.  ii.  +  Eph.  ii.  19,  20.  +  xxi.  14. 

ART.  VI.  0.  II.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  245 

teaches  us  there  is  no  other  foundation  than  Our 
Lord,  and  the  same  teaches  us  clearly  that  S.  Peter 
is  such  also,  yea  and  further  that  the  Apostles  are  so, 
we  are  not  to  give  up  the  first  teaching  for  the  second, 
the  second  for  the  third,  but  to  leave  them  all  three 
in  their  entirety.  Which  we  shall  easily  do  if  we 
consider  these  passages  in  good  faith  and  sincerely. 

Now  Our  Lord  is  in  very  deed  the  only  foundation 
of  the  Church ;  he  is  the  foundation  of  our  faith,  of 
our  hope  and  charity  ;  he  is  the  foundation  of  all 
ecclesiastical  authority  and  order,  and  of  all  the  doc- 
trine and  administration  which  are  therein.  Who  ever 
doubted  of  this  ?  But,  some  one  will  say  to  me,  if 
he  is  the  only  foundation,  how  do  you  place  S.  Peter 
also  as  foundation  ?  ( i .)  You  do  us  wrong ;  it  is  not 
we  who  place  him  as  foundation.  He,  besides  whom 
no  other  can  be  placed,  he  himself  placed  him.  So 
that  if  Christ  is  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  as  he 
is,  we  must  believe  that  S.  Peter  is  such  too,  since 
Our  Lord  has  placed  him  in  this  rank.  If  any  one 
besides  Our  Lord  himself  had  given  him  this  grade 
we  should  all  cry  out  with  you :  No  one  can  lay 
another  foundation  hut  that  which  is  laid.  (2.)  And 
then,  have  you  well  considered  the  words  of  S.  Paul  ? 
He  will  not  have  us  recognise  any  foundation  besides 
Our  Lord,  but  neither  is  S.  Peter  nor  are  the  other 
Apostles  foundations  besides  Our  Lord,  they  are  sub- 
ordinate to  Our  Lord :  their  doctrine  is  not  other 
than  that  of  their  Master,  but  their  very  Master's 
itself.  Thus  the  supreme  charge  which  S.  Peter  had 
in  the  militant  Church,  by  reason  of  which  he  is 
called  foundation  of  the  Church,  as  chief  and  governor, 
is  not  beside  the  authority  of  his  Master,  but  is  only 

246  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

a  participation  in  this,  so  that  he  is  not  the  founda- 
tion of  this  hierarchy  hesides  Our  Lord  but  rather  in 
Our  Lord :  as  we  call  him  most  holy  Father  in  Our 
Lord,  outside  whom  he  would  be  nothing.  We  do 
not  indeed  recognise  any  other  secular  authority  than 
that  of  His  Highness  [of  Savoy],  but  we  recognise 
several  under  this,  which  are  not  properly  other  than 
that  of  His  Highness,  because  they  are  only  certain 
portions  and  participations  of  it.  (3.)  In  a  word,  let 
us  interpret  S.  Paul  passage  by  passage  :  do  you  not 
think  he  makes  his  meaning  clear  enough  when  he 
says :  You  are  huilt  wpon  the  foundations  of  the  Pro- 
fhets  and  Ajpostles  ?  But  that  you  may  know  these 
foundations  to  be  no  other  than  that  which  he 
preached,  he  adds :  Christ  himself  heing  the  chief  corner- 
stone. Our  Lord  then  is  foundation  and  S.  Peter 
also,  but  with  so  notable  a  difference  that  in  respect 
of  the  one  the  other  may  be  said  not  to  be  it.  For 
Our  Lord  is  foundation  and  founder,  foundation  with- 
out other  foundation,  foundation  of  the  natural.  Mosaic 
and  Evangelic  Church,  foundation  perpetual  and  im- 
mortal, foundation  of  the  militant  and  triumphant, 
foundation  by  his  own  nature,  foundation  of  our  faith, 
hope  and  charity,  and  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra- 

S.  Peter  is  foundation,  not  founder,  of  the  whole 
Church ;  foundation  but  founded  on  another  founda- 
tion, which  is  Our  Lord ;  foundation  of  the  Evangelic 
Church  alone,  foundation  subject  to  succession,  founda- 
tion of  the  militant  not  of  the  triumphant,  foundation 
by  participation,  ministerial  not  absolute  foundation ; 
in  fine,  administrator  and  not  lord,  and  in  no  way  the 
foundation  of  our  faith,  hope  and  charity,  nor  of  the 

AET.  VI.  c.  II.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  247 

efficacy  of  the  Sacraments.  A  difference  so  great  as 
this  makes  the  one  unable,  in  comparison,  to  be  called 
a  foundation  by  the  side  of  the  other,  whilst,  however, 
taken  by  itself,  it  can  be  called  a  foundation,  in  order 
to  pay  proper  regard  to  the  Holy  Word.  So,  although 
he  is  the  Good  Shepherd,  he  gives  us  shepherds  ■^'' 
under  himself,  between  whom  and  his  Majesty  there 
is  so  great  a  difference  that  he  declares  himself  to  be 
the  only  shepherd.! 

At  the  same  time  it  is  not  good  reasoning  to  say : 
all  the  Apostles  in  general  are  called  foundations  of 
the  Church,  therefore  S.  Peter  is  only  such  in  the 
same  way  as  the  others  are.  On  the  contrary,  as  Our 
Lord  has  said  in  particular,  and  in  particular  terms, 
to  S.  Peter,  what  is  afterwards  said  in  general  of  the. 
others,  we  must  conclude  that  there  is  in  S.  Peter 
some  particular  property  of  foundation,  and  that  he 
in  particular  has  been  what  the  whole  college  has 
been  together.  The  whole  Church  has  been  founded 
on  all  the  Apostles,  and  the  whole  on  S.  Peter  in 
particular ;  it  is  then  S.  Peter  who  is  its  foundation 
taken  by  himself,  which  the  others  are  not.  For  to 
whom  has  it  ever  been  said  :  Thou  art  Peter,  &c.  1 
It  would  be  to  violate  the  Scripture  to  say  that  all 
the  Apostles  in  general  have  not  been  foundations 
of  the  Church.  It  would  also  be  to  violate  the 
Scripture  to  deny  that  S.  Peter  was  so  in  particular. 
It  is  necessary  that  the  general  word  should  produce 
its  general  effect,  and  the  particular  its  particular,  in 
order  that  nothing  may  remain  useless  and  without 
mystery  out  of  Scriptures  so  mysterious.  We  have 
only  to  see  for  what  general  reason  all  the  Apostles 
*  Eph.  iv.  II.  t  John  x.  ii  ;  Ezech.  xxidv.  23. 

248  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

are  called  foundations  of  the  Church :  namely,  because 
it  is  they  who  by  their  preaching  have  planted  the 
faith  and  the  Christian  doctrine  ;  in  which  if  we  are 
to  give  some  prerogative  to  any  one  of  the  Apostles 
it  will  be  to  that  one  who  said :  /  have,  laboured  more 
abundantly  than  all  they* 

And  it  is  in  this  sense  that  is  meant  the  passage 
of  the  Apocalypse.  For  the  twelve  Apostles  are  called 
foundations  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  because  they 
were  the  first  who  converted  the  world  to  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  which  was  as  it  were  to  lay  the  founda- 
tions of  the  glory  of  men,  and  the  seeds  of  their 
happy  immortality.  But  the  passage  of  S.  Paul  seems 
to  be  understood  not  so  much  of  the  person  of  the 
Apostles  as  of  their  doctrine.  For  it  is  not  said  that 
we  are  built  upon  the  Apostles,  but  upon  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Apostles — that  is,  upon  the  doctrine  which 
they  have  announced.  This  is  easy  to  see,  because 
it  is  not  only  said  that  we  are  upon  the  foundation 
of  the  Apostles,  but  also  of  the  Prophets,  and  we 
know  well  that  the  Prophets  have  not  otherwise  been 
foundations  of  the  Evangelical  Church  than  by  their 
doctrine.  And  in  this  matter  all  the  Apostles  seem 
to  stand  on  a  level,  unless  S.  John  and  S.  Paul  go 
first  for  the  excellence  of  their  theology.  It  is  then 
in  this  sense  that  all  the  Apostles  are  foundations  of 
the  Church ;  but  in  authority  and  government  S. 
Peter  precedes  all  the  others  as  much  as  the  head 
surpasses  the  members ;  for  he  has  been  appointed 
ordinary  pastor  and  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  the 
others  have  been  delegated  pastors  intrusted  with  as 
full   power   and    authority   over   all   the  rest   of   the 

*  1  Cor.  XV.  10. 

ART.  VI.  c.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  249 

Church  as  S.  Peter,  except  that  S.  Peter  was  the  head 
of  them  all  and  their  pastor  as  of  all  Christendom. 
Thus  they  were  foucdations  of  the  Church  equally 
with  him  as  to  the  conversion  of  souls  and  as  to 
doctrine;  but  as  to  the  authority  of  governing,  they 
were  so  unequally,  as  S.  Peter  was  the  ordinary  head 
not  only  of  the  rest  of  the  whole  Church  but  of  the 
Apostles  also.  For  Our  Lord  had  built  on  him  the 
whole  of  his  Church,  of  which  they  were  not  only 
parts  but  the  principal  and  noble  parts.  "  Although 
the  strength  of  the  Church,"  says  S.  Jerome,*  "  is 
equally  established  on  all  the  Apostles,  yet  amongst 
the  twelve  one  is  chosen  that  a  head  being  appointed 
occasion  of  schism  may  be  taken  away."  "  There  are, 
indeed,"  says  S.  Bernard  to  his  Eugenius,t  and  we 
can  say  as  much  of  S.  Peter  for  the  same  reason, 
"  there  are  others  who  are  custodians  and  pastors  of 
flocks,  but  thou  hast  inherited  a  name  as  much  the 
more  glorious  as  it  is  more  special." 



Our  adversaries  are  so  angry  at  our  proposing  to  them 
the  chair  of  S.  Peter  as  a  holy  touchstone  by  which 
we  may  test  the  meanings,  imaginations  and  fancies 
they   put   into   the    Scriptures,    that  they    overthrow 

*  ad  Joviu.  i.  27.  +  de  Consid.  ii.  8. 

250  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [pakt  n. 

heaven  and  earth  to  wrest  out  of  our  hands  the 
express  words  of  Our  Lord,  by  which,  having  said  to 
S.  Peter  that  he  would  build  his  Church  upon  him,  in 
order  that  we  might  know  more  particularly  what  he 
meant  he  continues  in  these  words  :  And  to  thee  I  will 
give  the  heys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  One  could  not 
speak  more  plainly.  He  has  said :  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Bar-jona,  because  flesh  and  blood,  &c.  And  I 
say  to  thee  that  thou  art  Peter,  .  .  .  and  to  thee  will 
I  give,  &c.  This  to  thee  refers  to  that  very  person  to 
whom  he  had  said :  And  I  say  to  thee  ; — it  is  then  to 
S.  Peter.  But  the  ministers  try  as  hard  as  they  can 
to  disturb  the  clear  fountain  of  the  Gospel,  so  that 
S.  Peter  may  not  be  able  to  find  his  keys  therein,  and 
that  we  may  turn  disgusted  from  the  water  of  the 
holy  obedience  which  we  owe  to  the  vicar  of  Our 

And  therefore  they  have  bethought  them  of  saying 
that  S.  Peter  had  received  this  promise  of  Our  Lord 
in  the  name  of  the  whole  Church,  without  having 
received  any  particular  privilege  in  his  own  person. 
But  if  this  is  not  violating  Scripture,  never  did  man 
violate  it.  For  was  it  not  to  S.  Peter  that  he  was 
speaking  ?  and  how  could  he  better  express  his  inten- 
tion than  by  saying  :  And  I  say  to  thee.  .  .  .  I  ivill 
give  to  thee  ?  Put  with  this  his  having  just  spoken 
of  the  Church,  and  said :  The  gates  of  hell  shall  not 
prevail  against  it,  which  would  have  prevented  him 
from  saying :  And  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the 
kingdom,  if  he  had  wished  to  give  them  to  the  whole 
Church  immediately.  For  he  does  not  say  to  it,  but, 
to  thee,  will  I  give.  If  it  is  allowed  thus  to  go  sur- 
mising over  clear  words,  there  will  be  nothing  in  the 

ART.  VI.  0.  III.]         The  Rule  of  Faith,  251 

Scripture  which  cannot  be  twisted  into  any  meaning 
whatever ;  though  I  do  not  deny  that  S.  Peter  in  this 
place  was  speaking  in  his  own  name  and  in  that  of  the 
whole  Church,  not  indeed  as  delegated  by  the  Church 
or  by  the  disciples  (for  we  have  not  the  shadow  of 
a  sign  of  this  commission  in  the  Scripture,  and  the 
revelation  on  which  he  founds  his  confession  had  been 
made  to  himself  alone — unless  the  whole  college  of 
Apostles  was  named  Simon  Bar-jona),  but  as  mouth- 
piece, prince  and  head  of  the  Church  and  of  the  others, 
according  to  S.  Chrysostom  and  S.  Cyril  on  this  place, 
and  "  on  account  of  the  primacy  *  of  his  Apostolate," 
as  S.  Augustine  says.  It  was  then  the  whole  Church 
that  spoke  in  the  person  of  S.  Peter  as  in  the  person 
of  its  head,  and  not  S.  Peter  that  spoke  in  the  person 
of  the  Church.  For  the  body  speaks  only  in  its  head, 
and  the  head  speaks  in  itself  not  in  its  body ;  and 
although  S.  Peter  was  not  as  yet  head  and  prince  of 
the  Church,  which  office  was  only  conferred  on  him 
after  the  resurrection  of  the  Master,  it  was  enough 
that  he  was  already  chosen  out  for  it  and  had  a 
pledge  of  it.  As  also  the  other  Apostles  had  not 
as  yet  the  Apostolic  power,  travelling  over  all  that 
blessed  country  rather  as  scholars  with  their  tutor  to 
learn  the  profound  lessons  which  afterwards  they 
taught  to  others  than  as  Apostles  or  Envoys,  which 
they  afterwards  were  throughout  the  whole  world, 
when  their  sound  went  forth  into  all  the  earth.t 
Neither  do  I  deny  that  the  rest  of  the  prelates  of  the 
Church  have  a  share  in  the  use  of  the  keys ;  and  as 

*  Ult.  in  Joan.     The  French  text  has  jperwajimce,  probably  a  mis- 
reading for  primacie.     [Tr.] 
t  Ps.  xviii.  5. 

252  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  n. 

for  the  Apostles  I  own  that  they  have  every  authority 
here.  I  say  only  that  the  giving  of  the  keys  is  here 
promised  principally  to  S.  Peter,  and  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Church.  For  although  it  is  he  who  has  received 
them,  still  it  is  not  for  his  private  advantage  but  for 
that  of  the  Church.  The  control  of  the  keys  is 
promised  to  S.  Peter  in  particular,  and  principally, 
then  afterwards  to  the  Church ;  but  it  is  promised 
principally  for  the  general  good  of  the  Church,  then 
afterwards  for  that  of  S.  Peter ;  as  is  the  case  with 
all  public  charges. 

But,  one  will  ask  me,  what  difference  is  there 
between  the  promise  which  Our  Lord  here  makes  to 
S.  Peter  to  give  him  the  keys,  and  that  which  he 
made  to  the  Apostles  afterwards  ?  For  in  truth  it 
seems  to  have  been  but  the  same,  because  Our  Lord 
explaining  what  he  meant  by  the  keys  said :  And 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  hind  upon  earth,  it  shall  he  hound 
also  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose,  &c. — 
which  is  just  what  he  said  to  the  Apostles  in  general : 
Whatsoever  you  shall  hind,  &c.*  If  then  he  promises 
to  all  in  general  what  he  promises  to  Peter  in  par- 
ticular, there  will  be  no  ground  for  saying  that 
S.  Peter  is  greater  than  one  of  the  others  by  this 

I  answer  that  in  the  promise  and  in  the  execution 
of  the  promise  Our  Lord  has  always  preferred  S. 
Peter  by  expressions  which  oblige  us  to  believe  that 
he  has  been  made  head  of  the  Church.  And  as  to 
the  promise,  I  confess  that  by  these  words :  And  what- 
soever thou  shalt  loose,  Our  Lord  has  promised  no  more 
to  S.  Peter  than  he  did  to  the  others  afterwards : 
*  Matt,  xviii.  18. 

ART.  VI.  0.  III.1         The  Rule  of  Faith.  253 

Whatsoever  you  shall  hind,  &c.  For  the  words  are  the 
same  in  substance  and  in  meaning  in  the  two  passages. 
I  admit  also  that  by  these  words :  And  whatsoever 
thou  shalt  loose,  said  to  S.  Peter,  he  explains  the 
preceding  :  And  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys,  but  I 
deny  that  it  is  the  same  thing  to  promise  the  keys 
and  to  say  :  Whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose.  Let  us  then 
see  what  it  is  to  promise  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  And  who  knows  not  that  when  a  master, 
going  away  from  his  house,  leaves  the  keys  with 
some  one,  what  he  does  is  to  leave  him  the  charge  and 
governance  thereof.  When  princes  make  their  entrance 
into  cities,  the  keys  are  presented  to  them  as  an 
acknowledgment  of  their  sovereign  authority. 

It  is  then  the  supreme  authority  which  Our  Lord 
here  promises  to  S.  Peter ;  and  in  fact  when  the 
Scripture  elsewhere  wishes  to  speak  of  a  sovereign 
authority  it  has  used  similar  terms.  In  the  Apocalypse 
(i.  17,  18),  when  Our  Lord  wishes  to  make  himself 
known  to  his  servant,  he  says  to  him :  /  am  the  first 
and  the  last,  and  alive  and  was  dead:  and  behold  I 
am  living  for  ever  and  ever,  and  have  the  keys  of  death 
and  of  hell.  What  does  he  mean  by  the  keys  of  death 
and  of  hell,  except  the  supreme  power  over  the  one 
and  the  other  ?  And  there  also  where  it  is  said : 
27iese  things  saith  the  Holy  one  and  the  True  one,  who 
hath  the  key  of  David :  he  that  openeth  and  no  man 
shutteth,  shutteth  and  no  man  openeth  (Ibid.  iii.  7) — 
what  can  we  understand  but  the  supreme  authority 
of  the  Church  ?  And  what  else  is  meant  by  what 
the  Angel  said  to  Our  Lady  (Luke  i.  32):  The  Lord 
God  shall  give  unto  him  the  throne  of  David  his  father, 
and  he  shall  reign  in  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever  ? — the 

254  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [paetil 

Holy  Spirit  making  us  know  the  kingship  of  our  Lord, 
now  by  the  seat  or  throne,  now  by  the  keys.  But  it 
is  the  commandment  which  in  Isaias  (xxii.)  is  given  to 
Eliacim  which  is  parallel  in  every  particular  with  that 
which  Our  Lord  gives  to  S.  Peter.  In  it  there  is 
described  the  deposition  of  a  sovereign-priest  and 
governor  of  the  Temple :  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  of 
hosts  :  go  get  thee  in  to  hi7n  that  dwelleth  in  the  taber- 
nacle, to  Sohna  who  is  over  the  temple  ;  and  thou  shalt 
say  to  him — what  dost  thou  here  ?  And  further  on : 
/  ivill  dej)ose  thee.  See  there  the  deposition  of  one, 
and  now  see  the  institution  of  the  other.  And  it 
shall  come  to  pass  in  that  dag  that  I  will  call  my 
servant  Eliacim  the  son  of  Helcias,  and  I  will  clothe  him 
with  thy  rote,  and  will  strengthen  him  with  thy  girdle, 
and  will  give  thy  power  into  his  hand  :  and  he  shall  be 
as  a  father  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  the 
house  of  Juda.  And  I  will  lay  the  key  of  the  house  of 
David  upon  his  shoulder  ;  and  he  shall  open,  and  none 
shall  shut :  and  he  shall  shut  and  none  shall  open. 
Could  anything  fit  better  than  these  two  Scriptures  ? 
For :  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona^  because  flesh 
and  blood  have  not  revealed  it  to  thee,  but  my  Father 
who  is  in  heaven — is  it  not  at  least  equivalent  to :  / 
will  call  my  servant  Eliaxim  the  son  of  Helcias  ?  And  I 
say  to  thee  that  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will 
build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell,  &c. — does  this 
not  signify  the  same  as  :  /  will  clothe  him  with  thy  robe, 
and  will  strengthen  him  with  thy  girdle,  and  will  give 
thy  potver  into  his  hand,  and  he  shall  be  as  a  father  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  house  of  Juda  ? 
And  what  else  is  it  to  be  the  foundation  or  foundation- 
stone  of  a  family  than  to  be  there  as  father,  to  have 

ART.  VI.  c.  III.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  255 

the  superintendence,  to  be  governor  there  ?  And  if 
one  has  had  this  assurance :  /  will  lay  the  'key  of  the 
house  of  David  wpon  his  shoulder,  the  other  has  had  no 
less,  who  had  the  promise :  And  I  will  give  to  thee  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  if  when  he  has 
opened  no  one  shall  shut,  when  he  has  shut  no  one 
shall  open ;  so,  when  the  other  shall  have  loosened 
no  one  shall  bind,  when  he  shall  have  bound  no  one 
shall  loosen.  The  one  is  Eliacim  son  of  Helcias,  the 
other,  Simon  the  son  of  Jonas  ;  the  one  is  clothed 
with  the  pontifical  robe,  the  other  with  heavenly 
revelation ;  the  one  has  power  in  his  hand,  the  other 
is  a  strong  rock ;  the  one  is  as  father  in  Jerusalem, 
the  other  is  as  foundation  in  the  Church ;  the  one  has 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  David,  the  other  those  of 
the  Church  of  the  Gospel ;  when  one  shuts  nobody 
opens,  when  one  binds  nobody  looses ;  when  one 
opens  no  one  shuts,  when  one  loosens  nobody  binds. 
What  further  remains  to  be  said  than  that  if  ever 
Eliacim  son  of  Helcias  was  head  of  the  Mosaic 
Temple,  Simon  son  of  Jonas  was  the  same  of  the 
Gospel  Church  ?  Eliacim  represented  Our  Lord  as 
figure,  S.  Peter  represents  him  as  lieutenant ;  Eliacim 
represented  him  in  the  Mosaic  Church,  and  S.  Peter 
in  the  Christian  Church.  Such  is  what  is  meant  by 
this  promise  of  giving  the  keys  to  S.  Peter,  a  promise 
which  was  never  made  to  the  other  Apostles. 

But  I  say  that  it  is  not  all  one  to  promise  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  and  to  say  :  JVhatever  thou  shalt 
loose,  although  one  is  an  explanation  of  the  other. 
And  what  is  the  difference  ? — certainly  just  that 
which  there  is  between  the  possession  of  an  authority 
and   the  exercise   of   it.     It   may    well  happen   that 

256  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

while  a  king  lives,  his  queen,  or  his  son,  may  have 
just  as  much  power  as  the  king  himself  to  chastise, 
absolve,  make  gifts,  grant  favours  :  such  person,  how- 
ever, will  not  have  the  sceptre  but  only  the  exercise 
of  it.  He  will  indeed  have  the  same  authority,  but 
not  in  possession,  only  in  use  and  exercise.  What 
he  does  will  be  valid,  but  he  will  not  be  head  or 
king,  he  must  recognise  that  his  power  is  extra- 
ordinary, by  commission  and  delegation,  whereas  the 
power  of  the  king,  which  may  be  no  greater,  is 
ordinary  and  is  his  own.  So  Our  Lord  promising  the 
keys  to  S.  Peter  remits  to  him  the  ordinary  authority, 
and  gives  him  that  office  in  ownership,  the  exercise 
of  which  he  referred  to  when  he  said  :  Whatsoever  thou 
shalt  loose,  &c,  Now  afterwards,  when  he  makes  the 
same  promise  to  the  other  Apostles,  he  does  not  give 
them  the  keys  or  the  ordinary  authority,  but  only 
gives  them  the  use  and  exercise  thereof.  This  differ- 
ence is  taken  from  the  very  terms  of  the  Scripture : 
for  to  loose  and  to  hind  signifies  but  the  action  and 
exercise,  to  have  the  keys,  the  habit.  .  .  .  See  how 
different  is  the  promise  which  Our  Lord  made  to  S. 
Peter  from  that  which  he  made  to  the  other  Apostles. 
The  Apostles  all  have  the  same  power  as  S.  Peter, 
but  not  in  the  same  rank,  inasmuch  as  they  have  it 
as  delegates  and  agents,  but  S.  Peter  as  ordinary  head 
and  permanent  officer.  And  in  truth  it  was  fitting 
that  the  Apostles  who  were  to  plant  the  Church 
everywhere,  should  all  have  full  power  and  entire 
authority  as  to  the  use  of  the  keys  and  the  exercise 
of  their  powers,  while  it  was  most  necessary  that 
one  amongst  them  should  have  charge  of  the  keys  by 
office  and  dignity, — "  that  the  Church,  which  is  one," 

ART.  VI.  0.  IV.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  257 

as  S.  Cyprian  says,^  "  should  by  the  word  of  the 
Lord  be  founded  upon  one  who  received  the  keys 



To  which  of  the  others  was  it  ever  said  :  /  Aat'e  "prayed 
for  thee,  Peter,  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and  thou  being 
once  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren?  (Luke  xxii.  32). 
Truly  they  are  two  privileges  of  great  importance, 
these.  Our  Lord,  when  about  to  establish  the  faith 
in  his  Church,  did  not  pray  for  the  faith  of  any  of  the 
others  in  particular,  but  only  of  S.  Peter  as  head.  For 
what  could  be  the  object  of  this  prerogative  ?  Satan 
hath  sought  you  (yos) — you  all ;  hut  I  have  prayed  for 
thee,  Peter^ — is  not  this  to  place  him  alone  as  respon- 
sible for  all,  as  head  and  guide  of  the  whole  flock  ? 
But  who  sees  not  how  pregnant  this  passage  is  for  our 
purpose  ?  Let  us  consider  what  precedes,  and  we  shall 
find  that  Our  Lord  had  declared  to  his  Apostles  that 
there  was  one  of  them  greater  than  the  others :  He 
who  is  the  greatest  among  you  .  .  .  and  he  that  is  the 
leader, — and  immediately  Our  Lord  goes  on  to  say  to 
him  that  the  adversary  was  seeking  to  sift  them,  all 
of  them,  as  wheat,  but  that  still  he  had  prayed  for 
him  in  particular  that  his  faith  should  not  fail.  I 
pray  you,  does  not  this  grace  which  was  so  peculiar  to 

*  Ad  Jubaianum. 
III.  B 

258  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  11. 

him,  and  which  was  not  common  to  the  others,  accord- 
ing to  S.  Thomas,  show  that  S.  Peter  was  that  one 
who  was  greatest  among  them  ?  All  are  tempted,  and 
prayer  is  made  for  one  alone.  But  the  words  follow- 
ing render  all  this  quite  evident.  For  some  Protestant 
might  say  that  he  prayed  for  S.  Peter  in  particular  on 
account  of  some  other  reason  that  might  be  imagined 
(for  the  imagination  ever  furnishes  support  enough  for 
obstinacy),  not  because  he  was  head  of  the  others  or 
because  the  faith  of  the  others  was  maintained  in  their 
pastor.  On  the  contrary,  gentlemen,  it  is  in  order 
that  heing  once  converted  he  might  confirm  his  hrethren. 
He  prays  for  S.  Peter  as  for  the  con  firmer  and  support 
of  the  others ;  and  what  is  this  but  to  declare  him 
head  of  the  others  ?  Truly  one  could  not  give  S. 
Peter  the  command  to  confirm  the  Apostles  without 
charging  him  to  have  care  of  them.  For  how  could 
he  put  this  command  in  practice  without  paying  regard 
to  the  weakness  or  the  strength  of  the  others  in  order 
to  strengthen  or  confirm  them  ?  Is  this  not  to  again 
call  him  foundation  of  the  Church  ?  If  he  supports, 
secures,  strengthens  the  very  foundation-stones,  how 
shall  he  not  confirm  all  the  rest  ?  If  he  has  the  charge 
of  supporting  the  columns  of  the  Church,  how  shall  he 
not  support  all  the  rest  of  the  building  ?  If  he  has 
the  charge  of  feeding  the  pastors,  must  he  not  be 
sovereign  pastor  himself  ?  The  gardener  who  sees  the 
young  plant  exposed  to  the  continual  rays  of  the  sun, 
and  wishes  to  preserve  it  from  the  drought  which 
threatens  it,  does  not  pour  water  on  each  branch,  but 
having  well  steeped  the  root  considers  that  all  the  rest 
is  safe,  because  the  root  continues  to  distribute  the 
moisture  to   the   rest   of  the  plant.      Our  Lord  also, 

ART.  VI.  0.  v.]  The  Rtde  of  Faith,  259 

having  planted  this  holy  assembly  of  the  disciples, 
prayed  for  the  head  and  the  root,  in  order  that  the 
water  of  faith  might  not  fail  to  him  who  was  therewith 
to  supply  all  the  rest,  and  in  order  that  through  the  head 
the  faith  might  always  be  preserved  in  the  Church. 

But  I  must  tell  you,  before  closing  this  part  of  my 
subject,  that  the  denial  which  S.  Peter  made  on  the 
day  of  the  Passion  must  not  trouble  you  here ;  for  he 
did  not  lose  the  faith,  but  only  sinned  as  to  the  con- 
fession of  it.  Fear  made  him  disavow  that  which  he 
believed.     He  believed  right  but  spoke  wrong. 



We  know  that  Our  Lord  gave  a  most  ample  procura- 
tion and  commission  to  his  Apostles  to  treat  with  the 
world  concerning  its  salvation,  when  he  said  to  them 
(Jolm  XX.)  :  As  the  Father  hath  sent  me  I  also  send  yoit 
.  .  .  receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost :  tohose  sins  you  shall 
forgive,  &c.  It  was  the  execution  of  that  promise  of 
his  which  had  been  made  them  in  general :  Wliatsoever 
you  shall  hind,  &c.  But  it  was  never  said  to  any  one 
of  the  other  Apostles  in  particular :  Thou  art  Peter,  and 
ti'pon  this  rock  I  will  huild  ray  Church,  nor  was  it  ever 
said  to  one  of  the  others :  Feed  my  sheep  (John  xxi. 
17).  S.  Peter  alone  had  this  charge.  They  were 
equal  in  the  Apostolate,  but  into  the  pastoral  dignity 
S.  Peter  alone  was  instituted :  Feed  my  sheep.     There 

26o  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

are  other  pastors  in  the  Church ;  each  must  feed  the 
flock  which  is  tender  him,  as  S.  Peter  says  (i  Ep.  v.  2), 
or  that  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  placed  him 
bishop,  according  to  S.  Paul  (Acts  xx.  28).  But,  "to 
which  of  the  others,"  says  S.  Bernard,*  "  were  ever  the 
sheep  so  absolutely,  so  universally  committed:  Feed 
T/iy  sheep  ?  " 

And  to  prove  that  it  is  truly  S.  Peter  to  whom  these 
words  are  addressed,  I  betake  myself  to  the  holy  Word. 
It  is  S.  Peter  only  who  is  called  Simon  son  of  John, 
or  of  eJona  (for  one  is  the  same  as  the  other,  and  Jona 
is  but  the  short  of  Joannah) ;  and  in  order  that  we 
may  know  that  this  Simon  son  of  John  is  really 
S.  Peter,  S.  John  bears  witness  that  it  was  Simon 
Peter — Jesus  saith  to  Simon  Peter :  Simon,  son  of  John, 
lovest  thou  me  more  than  these  ?  It  is  then  S.  Peter 
to  whom  in  particular  Our  Lord  says :  Feed  my  sheep. 

And  Our  Lord  puts  S.  Peter  apart  from  the  others 
in  that  place  where  he  compares  him  with  them  : 
Lovest  thou  me, — there  is  S.  Peter  on  the  one  side — 7nore 
than  these, — there  are  the  Apostles  on  the  other.  And 
although  all  the  Apostles  were  not  present,  yet  the 
principal  ones  were, — S.  James,  S.  John,  S.  Thomas 
and  others.  It  is  only  S.  Peter  who  is  grieved,  it  is 
only  S.  Peter  whose  death  is  foretold.  What  room  is 
there  then  for  doubting  that  it  was  to  him  alone  that 
this  word  feed  my  sheep  is  addressed,  a  word  which  is 
united  to  all  these  others  ? 

Now  that  to  feed  the  sheep  includes  the  charge  of 
them,  appears  clearly.  For  what  is  it  to  have  the 
charge  of  feeding  the  sheep,  but  to  be  pastor  and 
shepherd ;  and  shepherds  have  full  charge  of  the  sheep, 

*  De  Consid.  ii.  8. 

ART.  VI.  0.  v.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  261 

and  not  only  lead  them  to  pasture,  but  bring  them 
back,  fold  them,  guide  them,  rule  them,  keep  them  in 
fear,  chastise  them  and  guard  them.  In  Scripture  to 
rule  and  to  feed  the  people  is  taken  as  the  same 
thing,  which  is  easy  to  see  in  Ezekiel  (xxxiv.) ;  in  the 
second  Book  of  Kings  (v.  2) ;  and  in  several  places  of 
the  Psalms,  where,  according  to  the  original  there  is 
to  feed,  and  we  have  to  rule:  and  in  fact,  between 
ruling  and  pasturing  the  sheep  with  iron  crook  there 
is  no  difference.  In  Psalm  xxii.,  verse  I,  The  Lord 
rideth  me,  i.e.,  as  shepherd  governeth  me,  and  when  it 
is  said  that  David  had  been  elected  to  feed  Jacob  his 
servant  and  Israel  his  inheritance :  and  he  fed  them  in 
the  innocence  of  his  heart  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  71,  72),  it  is  just 
the  same  as  if  he  said  to  ride,  to  govern,  to  preside  over. 
And  it  is  after  the  same  figure  of  speech  that  the 
peoples  are  called  sheep  of  the  2^<^('Sture  of  Our  Lord 
(Ps.  xcix.  3),  so  that,  to  have  the  commandment  of 
feeding  the  Christian  sheep  is  no  other  thing  than  to 
be  their  ruler  and  pastor. 

It  is  now  easy  to  see  what  authority  Our  Lord 
intru&ted  to  S.  Peter  by  these  words :  Feed  my  sheep. 
For  in  truth  the  charge  is  so  general  that  it  includes 
all  the  faithful,  whatever  may  be  their  condition ;  the 
commandment  is  so  particular  that  it  is  addressed  only 
to  S.  Peter.  He  who  wishes  to  have  this  honour  of 
being  one  of  Our  Lord's  sheep  must  acknowledge  S. 
Peter,  or  him  wlio  takes  Peter's  place,  as  his  shepherd. 
''  If  thou  lovest  me  " — I  quote  S.  Bernard  * — ''feed  my 
sheep.  Which  sheep  ?  The  people  of  this  or  that 
city  or  region  or  even  kingdom  ?  My  sheep,  Christ 
says.     Is  it  not  clear  to  everybody  that  he  did  not 

*  De  Consid.  ii  8. 

262  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  h. 

mean  some,  but  handed  over  all.  There  is  no  excep- 
tion where  there  is  no  distinction.  And  perhaps  the 
others,  his  fellow-disciples,  were  present  when,  giving 
a  charge  to  one,  he  commended  unity  to  all  in  one 
flock  with  one  pastor,  according  to  that  (Cant,  vi.) : 
One,  is  my  dove,  my  heaittiful  one,  my  perfect  one. 
Where  unity  is  there  is  perfection." 

When  Our  Lord  said :  I  know  my  sheep,  he  spoke 
of  all ;  when  he  said  feed  my  sheep,  he  still  means  it 
of  all ;  for  Our  Lord  has  but  one  fold  and  one  flock. 
And  what  else  is  it  to  say :  feed  my  slieep,  but :  Take 
care  of  my  flock,  of  my  pastures,  or  of  my  sheep  and  my 
sheepfold  ?  It  is  then  entirely  under  the  charge  of  S. 
Peter.  For  if  he  said  to  him :  Feed  my  sheep,  either 
he  recommended  all  to  him  or  some  only ;  if  he  only 
recommended  some — which  ?  I  ask.  Were  it  not  to 
recommend  to  him  none,  to  recommend  to  him  some 
only  without  specifying  which,  and  to  put  him  in 
charge  of  unknown  sheep  ?  If  all,  as  the  Word 
expresses  it,  then  he  was  the  general  pastor  of  the 
whole  Church.  And  the  matter  is  thus  rightly  settled 
beyond  doubt.  It  is  the  common  explanation  of  the 
Ancients,  it  is  the  execution  of  his  promises.  But 
lliere  is  a  mystery  in  this  institution  which  our  S. 
Bernard  does  not  allow  me  to  forget,  now  that  I  have 
taken  him  as  my  guide  in  this  point.  It  is  that  Our 
Saviour  thrice  charges  him  to  do  the  office  of  pastor, 
saying  to  him  first :  Feed  my  lamhs ;  secondly ,  my 
lamhs ;  thirdly,  my  sheep  : — not  only  to  make  this 
institution  more  solemn,  but  to  show  that  he  gave  into 
his  charge  not  only  the  people,  but  the  pastors  and 
Apostles  themselves,  who,  as  sheep,  nourish  the  lambs 
and  young  sheep,  and  are  mothers  to  them. 

ART.  VI.  c.  v.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  263 

And  it  makes  nothing  against  this  truth  that  S. 
Paul  and  the  other  Apostles  have  fed  many  peoples 
with  the  Gospel  doctrine,  for  being  all  under  the  charge 
of  S.  Peter,  what  they  have  done  belongs  also  to  him, 
as  the  victory  does  to  the  general,  though  the  captains 
have  fought :  nor,  that  S.  Paul  received  from  S.  Peter 
the  right  hand  of  felloicshi;p  (Gal.  ii.  9),  for  they  were 
companions  in  preaching,  but  S.  Peter  was  greater  and 
chief  in  the  pastoral  office ;  and  the  chiefs  call  the 
soldiers  and  captains  comrades. 

Nor  that  S.  Paul  was  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles 
and  S.  Peter  of  the  Jews ;  because  it  was  not  to  divide 
the  government  of  the  Church,  nor  to  hinder  either 
the  one  or  the  other  from  convertinsj  the  Gentiles  and 
the  Jews  indifferently,  nor  because  the  chief  authority 
was  not  in  the  hands  of  one ;  but  it  was  to  assign 
them  the  quarters  where  they  were  principally  to 
labour  in  preaching,  in  order  that  each  one  attacking 
impiety  in  his  own  province  the  world  might  the 
sooner  be  filled  with  the  sound  of  the  Gospel. 

Nor  that  he  would  seem  not  to  have  known  that  the 
Gentiles  were  to  belong  to  the  fold  of  Our  Lord,  which 
was  confided  to  him :  for  what  he  said  to  the  good 
Cornelius :  In  truth  I  perceive  that  God  is  no  respecter 
of  persons ;  hut  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth  him  and 
worketh  justice  is  acceptable  to  him  (Acts  x.),  is  nothing 
different  from  what  he  had  said  before :  Whosoever 
shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  he  saved  (ii.), 
and  the  prophecy  which  he  had  explained :  And  in 
thy  seed  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  he  hlessed  (iii-). 
He  was  only  uncertain  as  to  the  time  when  the  bring- 
ing back  of  the  Gentiles  was  to  begin,  according  to  the 
holy  Word  of  the  Master :  You  shall  he  witnesses  unto 

264  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  iu 

me  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Jvdcea  and  Samaria,  and 
even  to  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth  (i.),  and  that  of 
S.  Paul :  To  you  it  behoved  us  to  speak  first  the  ivord 
of  God^  hut  seeing  you  reject  it,  loe  turn  to  the  Gentiles 
(xiii.),  just  as  Our  Lord  had  akeady  opened  the  mind 
of  the  Apostles  to  the  intelligence  of  the  Scriptures 
when  he  said  to  them :  Thus  it  behoved  .  .  .  that 
penance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  his 
name  among  all  nations,  beginning  with  Jerusalem 
(Luke  ult.). 

Nor  that  the  Apostles  instituted  deacons  without 
the  command  of  S.  Peter,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
(vi.) ;  for  S.  Peter's  presence  there  sufficiently  author- 
ised that  act;  besides,  we  do  not  deny  that  the 
Apostles  had  full  powers  of  administration  in  the 
Church,  under  the  pastoral  authority  of  S.  Peter. 
And  our  bishops,  in  union  with  the  Holy  See  of  Rome, 
ordain  both  deacons  and  priests  without  any  special 

Nor  that  the  Apostles  sent  Peter  and  John  into 
Samaria  (lb.  viii.),  for  the  people  also  sent  Phinees, 
who  was  the  High  Priest,  and  their  superior,  to  the  chil- 
dren of  Ruben  and  Gad  (Jos.  xxii.) ;  and  the  centurion 
sent  the  chiefs  and  heads  of  the  Jews,  whom  he  con- 
sidered to  be  greater  than  himself  (Luke  vii.) ;  and  S. 
Peter  being  in  the  council,  liimself  consented  to  and 
authorised  his  own  mission. 

Nor  finally,  that  which  is  made  so  much  of — that 
S.  Paul  ivithstood  S.  Peter  to  the  face  (Gal.  ii.),  for  every 
one  knows  that  it  is  permitted  to  the  inferior  to  correct 
the  greater  and  to  admonish  him  with  charity  and 
submission  when  charity  requires ;  witness  our  S. 
Bernard  in  his  books  On  Consideration ;  and  on  this 

ART.  VI.  0.  VI.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  265 

subject  the  great  S.  Gregory  *  says  these  all  golden 
words  :  "  He  became  the  follower  of  his  inferior,  though 
before  him  in  dignity ;  so  that  he  who  was  first  in 
the  high  dignity  of  the  Apostolate  might  be  first  in 


SIXTH    PROOF.       FROM    THE    ORDER    IN    WHICH    THE 

It  is  a  thing  very  worthy  of  consideration  in  this 
matter  that  the  Evangelists  never  name  either  all  the 
Apostles  or  a  part  of  them  together  without  putting 
S.  Peter  ever  at  the  very  top,  ever  at  the  head  of  the 
band.  This  we  cannot  consider  to  be  done  accidentally  ; 
for  it  is  perpetually  observed  by  the  Evangelists ;  and 
it  is  not  four  or  five  times  that  they  are  tlius  named 
together,  but  very  often.  And  besides,  as  to  the  other 
Apostles,  they  do  not  keep  any  particular  order. 

The,  names  of  the  twelve  Apostles  are  these,  says  S. 
Matthew  (x.) :  The  first,  Simo7i  who  is  called  Peter, 
and  Andreio  his  brother  ;  James  the  son  of  Zehedee  and 
John  his  brother ;  Philip  and  Bartholomew,  Thomas 
and  Mathew  the  publican,  James  of  Alpheus  and  Thad- 
deus,  Simon  Chanancus,  and  Judas  Tscariot.  He  names 
S.  Andrew  the  2d ;  S.  Mark  names  him  the  4th ; 
and  to  better  show  that  it  makes  no  difference,  S.  Luke, 
who  in  one  place  has  put  him  2d,  in  another  puts 
him  4th.     S.   Matthew  puts  S.  John  4th ;  S.  Mark 

*  In  Ezech.  ii.  6. 

266  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

puts  him  3d ;  S.  Luke  in  one  place  4th,  in  another 
2d.  S.  Matthew  puts  S.  James  3d;  S.  Mark  puts 
him  2d.  In  short,  it  is  only  S.  Philip,  S.  James  of 
Alpheus  and  Judas  who  are  not  sometimes  higher, 
sometimes  lower.  When  the  Evangelists  elsewhere 
name  all  the  Apostles  together  there  is  no  principle 
except  as  regards  S.  Peter,  who  goes  first  everywhere. 
Well  now,  let  us  imagine  that  we  were  to  see  in  the 
country,  in  tlie  streets,  in  meetings,  what  we  read  in 
the  Gospels  (and  in  truth  it  is  more  certain  than  if  we 
had  seen  it) — if  we  saw  S.  Peter  the  first  and  all  the 
rest  grouped  together,— should  we  not  judge  that  the 
others  were  equals  and  companions,  and  S.  Peter  the 
chief  and  captain. 

But,  besides  this,  very  often  when  tlie  Evangelists 
talk  of  the  Apostolic  company  they  name  only  Peter, 
and  mention  the  others  as  accessory  and  following: 
And  Simon  and  they  who  were  with  him  followed  after 
him  (Mark  i.) :  BiU  Peter  and  they  that  were  with  him 
were  heavy  with  sleep  (Luke  ix.)  You  know  well  that 
to  name  one  person  and  put  the  others  all  together 
with  him,  is  to  make  him  the  most  important  and  the 
others  his  inferiors. 

Very  often  again  he  is  named  separately  from  the 
others,  as  by  the  Angel :  Tell  his  disciples  and  Peter 
(Mark  xvi)  :  But  Peter  standing  up,  with  the  eleven 
.  .  .  they  said  to  Peter  and  the  rest  of  the  Ajjostles 
(Acts  ii.) :  Peter  then  answering  and  the  Apostles  said, 
Have  we  not  power  to  lead  about  a  woman,  a  sister,  as 
well  as  the  rest  of  the  apostles,  and  the  brethren  of  the 
Lord  and  Cephas  (i  Cor.  ix.)  ?  What  does  this 
mean,  to  say :  Tell  his  disciples  and  Peter — Peter  and 
the  Apostles  answered?  Was   Peter   not   an  Apostle? 

ART.  VI.  0.  vl]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  267 

Either  he  was  less  or  more  than  the  others,  or  he 
was  equal.  No  man,  who  is  not  altogether  mad, 
will  say  he  was  less.  If  he  is  equal  and  stands 
on  a  level  with  the  others,  why  is  he  put  by  himself  ? 
If  there  is  nothing  particular  in  him,  why  is  it  not 
just  as  well  to  say  :  Tell  his  disciples  and  Andrew,  or 
John  ?  Certainly  it  must  be  for  some  particular 
quality  which  is  in  him  more  than  in  the  others,  and 
because  he  was  not  a  simple  Apostle.  So  that  hav- 
ing said  :  Tell  his  disciples,  or,  as  the  rest  of  the  Apostles, 
how  can  one  longer  doubt  that  S.  Peter  is  more  than 
Apostle  and  disciple  ?  Only  once  in  the  Scriptures 
S.  Peter  is  named  after  S.  James,  James  and  Cephas 
and  John  gave  the  right  hands  of  felloiuship  (Gal.  ii.) 
But  in  truth  there  is  too  much  occasion  to  doubt 
whether  in  the  original  and  anciently  S.  Peter  was 
named  first  or  second,  to  allow  any  valid  conclusion 
to  be  drawn  from  this  place  alone.  For  S.  Augustine, 
S.  Ambrose,  S.  Jerome,  both  in  the  commentary  and 
in  the  text,  have  written  Peter,  James,  John,  which 
they  could  never  have  done  if  they  had  not  found 
this  same  order  in  their  copies :  S.  Chrysostom  has 
done  the  same  in  the  commentary.  All  this  shows 
the  diversity  of  copies,  which  makes  the  conclusion 
doubtful  on  either  side.  But  even  if  the  copies  we 
now  have  were  originals,  one  could  deduce  nothing 
from  this  single  passage  against  the  order  of  so  many 
others ;  for  S.  Paul  might  be  keeping  to  the  order  of 
the  time  in  which  he  received  the  hand  of  fellowship, 
or  without  concerning  himself  about  the  order  might 
have  written  first  the  one  which  came  first  to  his 

But  S.  Matthew  shows  us  clearly  what  order  there  was 

268  The  Catholic  Controversy.        [part.  n. 

amongst  the  Apostles,  that  is,  that  one  was  first,  and 
the  remainder  were  equal  without  2d  or  3d.  First, 
says  he,  Simon  who  is  called  Peter ;  he  does  not  say 
2d,  Andrew,  3d,  James,  but  goes  on  simply  naming 
them,  to  let  us  know  that  provided  S.  Peter  was 
first  all  the  rest  were  in  the  same  rank,  and  that 
amongst  them  there  was  no  precedence.  First,  says 
he,  Peter,  and  Andrew.  From  this  is  derived  the  name 
of  Primacy.  For  if  he  were  first  [primus),  his  place 
was  first,  his  rank  first,  and  this  quality  of  his  was 

It  is  answered  to  this  that  if  the  Evangelists  here 
named  S.  Peter  the  first,  it  was  because  he  was  the 
most  advanced  in  age  amongst  the  Apostles,  or  on 
account  of  some  privilege  which  existed  amongst  them. 
But  what  is  the  worth  of  such  a  reason  as  this,  I 
should  like  to  know  ?  To  say  that  S.  Peter  was  the 
oldest  of  the  society  is  to  seek  at  hazard  an  excuse  for 
obstinacy ;  and  the  Scripture  distinctly  tells  us  he  was 
not  the  earliest  Apostle  when  it  testifies  that  S. 
Andrew  led  him  to  Our  Lord.  The  reasons  are  seen 
quite  clearly  in  the  Scripture,  but  because  you  are 
resolved  to  maintain  the  contrary,  you  go  seeking 
about  with  your  imagination  on  every  side.  Why  say 
that  S.  Peter  was  the  oldest,  since  it  is  a  pure  fancy 
which  has  no  foundation  in  the  Scripture,  and  is 
contrary  to  the  Ancients  ?  Why  not  say  rather  that 
he  was  the  one  on  whom  Christ  founded  his  Church, 
to  whom  he  had  given  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  who  was  the  confirmer  of  the  brethren  ? — for 
all  this  is  in  the  Scripture.  What  you  want  to  main- 
tain you  do  maintain ;  whether  it  has  a  base  in 
Scripture  or  not  makes  no  difference.     And  as  to  the 

ARTvi.  0.  VII.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  269 

other  privileges,  let  anybody  go  over  them  to  me  in 
order,  and  none  will  be  found  special  to  S.  Peter  but 
those  which  make  him  head  of  the  Church. 


PRIMACY    OF    S.    PETER. 

If  I  wanted  to  bring  together  here  all  that  is  to  be 
found,  I  should  make  this  proof  as  large  as  I  want  to 
make  all  the  section,  and  without  effort  on  my  part. 
For  that  excellent  theologian,  Eobert  Bellarmine,  would 
put  many  things  into  my  hands.  But  particularly  has 
Doctor  Nicholas  Sanders  treated  this  subject  so  solidly 
and  so  amply  that  it  is  hard  to  say  anything  about  it 
which  he  has  not  said  or  written  in  his  books  On  the 
Visible  Monarchy,     I  will  give  some  extracts. 

Whoever  will  read  the  Scriptures  attentively  will 
see  this  Primacy  of  S.  Peter  everywhere.  If  the 
Church  is  compared  to  a  building,  as  it  is,  its  rock 
and  its  secondary  foundation  is  S.  Peter  (Matt.  xvi.). 

If  you  say  it  is  like  a  family,  it  is  only  Our  Lord 
who  pays  tribute  as  head  of  the  household,  and  after 
him  S.  Peter  as  his  lieutenant  (lb.  xvii.). 

If  to  a  ship,  S.  Peter  is  its  captain,  and  in  it  Our 
Lord  teaches  (Luke  v.). 

If  to  a  fishery,  S.  Peter  is  the  first  in  it ;  the  true 
disciples  of  Our  Lord  fish  only  with  him  (lb.  and 
John  xxi.). 

270  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  w. 

If  to  draw-nets  (Matt,  xiii.),  it  is  S.  Peter  who  casts 
them  into  the  sea,  S.  Peter  who  draws  them ;  the  other 
disciples  are  his  coadjutors.  It  is  S.  Peter  who  brings 
them  to  land  and  presents  the  fish  to  Our  Lord 
(Luke  v.,  John  xxi.). 

Do  you  say  it  is  like  an  embassy  ? — S.  Peter  is 
first  ambassador  (Matt.  x.). 

Do  you  say  it  is  a  brotherhood  ? — S.  Peter  is  first, 
the  governor  and  confirmer  of  the  rest  (Luke  xxii.). 

Would  you  rather  have  it  a  kingdom  ? — S.  Peter 
receives  its  keys  (Matt.  xvi.). 

Will  you  consider  it  a  flock  or  fold  of  sheep  and 
Iambs  ? — S.  Peter  is  its  pastor  and  shepherd-general 
(John  xxi.). 

Say  now  in  conscience,  how  could  Our  Lord  testify 
his  intention  more  distinctly.  Perversity  cannot  find 
use  for  its  eyes  amid  such  light.  S,  Andrew  came  the 
first  to  follow  Our  Lord ;  and  it  was  he  who  brought 
his  brother,  S.  Peter,  and  S.  Peter  precedes  him  every- 
where. What  does  this  signify  except  that  the  advan- 
tage one  had  in  time  the  other  had  in  dignity  ? 

But  let  us  continue.  When  Our  Lord  ascends  to 
heaven,  all  the  holy  Apostolic  body  goes  to  S.  Peter, 
as  to  the  common  father  of  the  family  (Acts  i.). 

S.  Peter  rises  up  amongst  them  and  speaks  the  first, 
and  teaches  the  interpretation  of  weighty  prophecy  (lb.). 

He  has  the  first  care  of  the  restoration  and  increase 
of  the  Apostolic  college  (lb.).  It  is  he  who  first  pro- 
posed to  make  an  Apostle,  which  is  no  act  of  light 
authority  ;  for  the  Apostles  have  all  had  successors, 
and  by  death  have  not  lost  their  dignity.  But  S. 
Peter  teaching  the  Church  shows  both  that  Judas  had 
lost  his  Apostolate  and  that  another  was  needed  in  hia 

ART.  VI.  c.  VII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  271 

place,  contrary  to  the  ordinary  course  of  this  authority, 
which  in  the  others  continues  after  death,  and  which 
they  will  even  exercise  on  the  Day  of  Judgment,  when 
they  shall  be  seated  around  the  Judge,  judging  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 

The  Apostles  have  no  sooner  received  the  Holy 
Ghost  than  S.  Peter,  as  chief  of  the  Evangelic  Embassy, 
being  with  his  eleven  companions,  begins  to  publish, 
according  to  his  office,  the  holy  tidings  of  salvation  to 
the  Jews  in  Jerusalem.  He  is  the  first  catechist  of 
the  Church,  and  preacher  of  penance  ;  the  others  are 
with  him  and  are  all  asked  questions,  but  S.  Peter 
alone  answers  for  all  as  chief  of  all  (Acts  ii.). 

If  a  hand  is  to  be  put  into  the  treasury  of  miracles 
confided  to  the  Church,  though  S.  John  is  present  and 
is  asked,  S.  Peter  alone  puts  in  his  hand  (lb.  iii.). 

When  the  time  comes  for  beginning  the  use  of  the 
spiritual  sword  of  the  Church,  to  punish  a  lie,  it  is  S. 
Peter  who  directs  the  first  blow  upon  Ananias  and 
Saphira  (lb.  v.)  :  from  this  springs  the  hatred  which 
lying  heretics  bear  against  his  See  and  succession ; 
because,  as  S.  Gregory  says,^  "  Peter  by  his  word  strikes 
liars  dead." 

He  is  the  first  who  recognises  and  refutes  heresy  in 
Simon  Magus  (lb.  viii.)  :  hence  conies  the  irreconcile- 
able  hatred  of  all  heretics  against  his  See. 

He  is  the  first  who  raises  the  dead,  when  he  prays 
for  the  devout  Tabitha  (lb.  ix.). 

When  it  is  time  to  put  the  sickle  into  the  harvest 
of  paganism,  it  is  S.  Peter  to  whom  the  revelation  is 
made,  as  to  the  head  of  all  the  labourers,  and  the 
steward  of  the  farmstead  (lb.  x.). 
*  In  Ezech.  ii.  i8. 

272  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  n. 

The  good  Italian  centurion,  Cornelius,  is  ready  to 
receive  grace  of  the  Gospel;  he  is  sent  to  S.  Peter, 
that  the  Gentiles  may  by  his  hands  be  blessed  and 
consecrated :  he  is  the  first  in  commanding  the  pagans 
to  be  baptized  (Acts  x.). 

When  a  General  Council  is  sitting,  S.  Peter  as 
president  therein  opens  the  gate  to  judgment  and 
definition  ;  and  his  sentence  [is]  followed  by  the  rest, 
his  private  revelation  becomes  a  law  (lb.  xv.). 

S.  Paul  declares  that  he  went  to  Jerusalem  ex- 
pressly to  see  Peter,  and  stayed  with  him  fifteen  days 
(Gal  i.).  He  saw  S.  James  there,  but  to  see  him  was 
not  what  he  went  for, — only  to  see  S.  Peter.  What 
does  this  signify  ?  Why  did  he  not  go  as  much  to 
see  the  great  and  most  celebrated  Apostle  S.  James 
as  to  see  S.  Peter  ?  Because  we  look  at  people  in  their 
head  and  face,  and  S.  Peter  was  the  head  of  all  the 

When  S.  Peter  and  S.  James  were  in  prison  the 
Evangelist  testifies  that  grayer  was  made  luitlwut  cease- 
ing  ly  the  Church  to  God  for  S.  Peter,  as  for  the  general 
head  and  common  ruler  (Acts  xii.). 

If  all  this  put  together  does  not  make  you  acknow- 
ledge S.  Peter  to  be  head  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
Apostles,  I  confess  that  Apostles  are  not  Apostles, 
pastors  not  pastors,  and  doctors  not  doctors.  For  in 
what  other  more  express  words  could  be  made  known 
the  authority  of  an  Apostle  and  pastor  over  the  people 
than  those  which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  placed  in  the 
Scriptures  to  show  that  S.  Peter  was  above  Apostles, 
pastors,  and  the  whole  Church  ? 

^RT.  VI.  c.  VIII.]        The  Rtile  of  Faith.  273 



It  is  true  that  Scripture  suffices,  but  let  us  see  who 
wrests  it  and  violates  it.  If  we  were  the  first  to 
draw  conclusions  in  favour  of  the  Primacy  of  S.  Peter, 
one  mio^ht  think  that  we  were  wrestine?  it.  But  how 
do  things  stand  ?  It  is  most  clear  on  the  point,  and 
has  been  understood  in  this  sense  by  all  the  primitive 
Church.  Those,  then,  force  it  who  bring  in  a  new 
sense,  who  gloss  it  against  the  natural  meaning  of  the 
words,  and  against  the  sense  of  Antiquity.  If  this  be 
lawful  for  everybody,  the  Scripture  will  no  longer  be 
anything  but  a  toy  for  fanciful  and  perverse  wits. 

What  is  the  meaning  of  this — that  the  Church  has 
never  held  as  patriarchal  sees  any  but  those  of  Alex- 
andria, of  Eome,  and  of  Antioch  ?  One  may  invent  a 
thousand  fancies,  but  there  is  no  other  reason  than 
that  which  S.  Leo  produces :  ^ — because  S.  Peter 
founded  these  three  sees  they  have  been  called  and 
esteemed  patriarchal,  as  testify  the  Council  of  Nice, 
and  that  of  Chalcedon,  in  which  a  great  difference  is 
made  between  these  three  sees  and  the  others.  As  for 
those  of  Constantinople  and  Jerusalem,  the  above- 
named  Councils  show  how  differently  they  are  con- 
sidered from  those  three  others  founded  by  S.  Peter. 

Not  that  the  Council  of  Nice  speaks  of  the  see  of 
Constantinople ;  for  Constantinople  was  of  no  import- 
ance at  all  at  that  time,  having  only  been  built  by  the 

*  Ad  Anat. 
III.  S 

2  74  ^'^^  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  h. 

great  Constantine,  who  dedicated  and  named  it  in  the 
twenty-fifth  year  of  his  Empire :  but  the  Council  of 
Nice  treats  of  the  see  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  of 
Chalcedon  of  the  see  of  Constantinople. 

By  the  precedence  and  pre-eminence  of  these  three 
sees,  the  ancient  Church  testified  sufficiently  that  she 
held  S.  Peter  for  her  chief,  who  had  founded  them. 
Otherwise  why  did  she  not  place  also  in  the  same 
rank  the  see  of  Ephesus,  founded  by  S.  Paul,  confirmed 
and  assured  by  S.  John ;  or  the  see  of  Jerusalem,  in 
which  S.  James  had  conversed  and  presided  ? 

What  else  did  she  testify,  when  in  the  public  and 
patent  letters  which  they  anciently  called  formatce, 
after  the  first  letter  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  there  was  put  the  first  letter  of  Peter,  except 
that  after  Almighty  God,  who  is  the  absolute  King, 
the  lieutenant's  authority  is  in  great  esteem  with  all 
those  who  are  good  Christians  ? 

As  for  the  consent  of  the  Fathers  concerninsf  this 
point,  Surius,  Sanders,  and  a  thousand  others  have 
taken  away  from  posterity  all  occasion  of  doubting  it. 
I  will  only  bring  forward  the  names  by  which  the 
Fathers  have  called  him,  which  sufficiently  show  their 
belief  concerning  his  authority. 

Optatus  of  Milevis  called  him  "  the  head  of  the 
Churches"  (Contra  Parm.  ii.).  They  have  called  him 
"  Head  of  the  Church,"  as  S.  Jerome  (adv.  Jov.  i.), 
and  S.  Chrysostom  (Hom.  1 1  in  Matt.).  "  Happy 
foundation  of  the  Church,"  as  S.  Hilary  (in  Matt,  xvi.), 
and  "  Janitor  of  heaven,  the  first  of  the  Apostles,"  as 
S.  Augustine  (in  J.  5  6)  after  S.  Matthew.  "  Mouth 
and  crown  of  the  Apostles,"  as  Origen  (in  Luc.  xvii.), 
and    S.    Chrysostom    (in    Matt.    55).     "  Mouth    and 

ART.  VI.  c.  VIII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  275 

prince  of  the  Apostles/'  as  the  same  S.  Chrysostom 
(in  J.  87).  "  Guardian  of  the  brethren,  and  of  the 
whole  world  "  (lb.  ult.).  "  Pastor  of  the  Church  and 
head  stronger  than  adamant"  (Id.  in  Matt.  55). 
"  The  immovable  rock,  immovable  pedestal,  the 
great  Apostle,  first  of  the  disciples;  first  called  and 
first  obeying  "  (Id.  in  Poen.  3).  "  Firmament  of  the 
Church,  leader  and  master  of  Christians,  column  of 
the  spiritual  Israel,  guardian  of  the  feeble,  master  of 
the  heavens,  mouth  of  Christ,  supreme  head  of  the 
Apostles  "  (Id.  in  ador.  eaten,  et  glad.  Apost.  princ. 
Petri).  "  Prince  of  the  Church,  port  of  faith,  master 
of  the  world  "  (Id.  in  SS.  P.  et  P.  et  Eliam).  "First 
in  the  supremacy  of  the  Apostolate  "  (Greg,  in  Ezech. 
xviii.).  "  High  Priest  of  Christians  "  (Euseb.  in  Chron. 
44).  "Master  of  the  army  of  God"  (Id.  Hist, 
ii.  1 4).  "  Set  over  the  other  disciples "  (Bas.  de 
Judic.  Dei  9).  "  President  of  the  world "  (Chrys.  in 
Matt.  II).  "  The  Lord  of  the  house  of  God,  and 
prince  of  all  his  possession"  (P)ern.  Ep.  137,  ad 

Who  shall  dare  to  oppose  this  company  ?  Thus 
they  speak,  thus  they  understand  the  Scripture,  and 
according  to  it  do  they  hold  that  all  these  names  and 
titles  are  due  to  S.  Peter. 

The  Church  then  was  left  on  earth  by  her  Master 
and  Spouse  with  a  visible  chief  and  lieutenant  of  the 
Master  and  Lord.  The  Church  is  therefore  to  be 
always  united  together  in  a  visible  chief-minister 
of  Christ. 

276  The  CatJiolic  Controversy,         [part  n. 



I  HAVE  clearly  proved  so  far  that  the  Catholic  Church 
was  a  monarchy  in  which  Christ's  head -minister 
governed  all  the  rest.  It  was  not  then  S.  Peter  only 
who  was  its  head,  but,  as  the  Church  has  not  failed 
by  the  death  of  S.  Peter,  so  the  authority  of  a  head 
has  not  failed  ;  otherwise  it  would  not  be  one,  nor 
would  it  be  in  the  state  in  which  its  founder  had 
placed  it.  And  in  truth  all  the  reasons  for  which 
Our  Lord  put  a  head  to  this  body,  do  not  so  much 
require  that  it  should  be  there  in  that  beginning 
when  the  Apostles  who  governed  the  Church  were 
holy,  humble,  charitable,  lovers  of  unity  and  concord, 
as  in  the  progress  and  continuation  thereof,  when 
charity  having  now  grown  cold  each  one  loves  himself, 
no  one  will  obey  the  word  of  another  nor  submit  to 

I  ask  you : — if  the  Apostles,  whose  understanding 
the  Holy  Spirit  enlightened  so  immediately,  who  were 
so  steadfast  and  so  strong,  needed  a  confirm er  and 
pastor  as  the  form  (forme)  and  visible  maintenance  of 
their  union,  and  of  the  union  of  the  Church,  how 
much  more  now  has  the  Church  need  of  one,  when 
there  are  so  many  infirmities  and  weaknesses  in  the 
members  of  the  Church  ?  And  if  the  wills  of  the 
Apostles,  so  closely  united  in  charity,  had  need  of  an 
exserior  bond  in  the  authority  of  a  head,  how  much 

ART.  VI.  c.  IX.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  277 

more  afterwards  when  charity  has  grown  so  cold  is 
there  need  of  a  visible  authority  and  ruler  ?  And  if, 
as  S.  Jerome  says,  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles  :  "  One 
is  chosen  from  amongst  all,  in  order  that,  a  head  being 
established,  occasion  of  schism  may  be  taken  away,"  * 
how  much  more  now,  for  the  same  reason,  must  there 
be  a  chief  in  the  Church  ?  The  fold  of  Our  Lord  is  to 
last  till  the  consummation  of  the  world,  in  visible 
unity :  the  unity  then  of  external  government  must 
remain  in  it,  and  nobody  has  authority  to  change  the 
form  of  administration  save  Our  Lord  who  estab- 
lished it.t 

All  this  has  been  well  proven  above,  and  it  follows 
therefrom  that  S.  Peter  has  had  successors,  has  them 
in  these  days,  and  will  have  them  even  to  the  end  of 
the  ages. 

I  do  not  profess  here  to  treat  difficulties  to  the  very 
bottom.  It  is  enough  for  my  purpose  to  indicate  some 
principal  reasons  and  to  expose  our  belief  precisely. 
Indeed,  if  I  were  to  take  notice  of  the  objections  which 
are  made  on  this  point,  while  I  should  find  small 
difficulty  I  should  have  great  trouble,  and  most  of 
them  are  so  slight  that  they  are  not  worth  losing  time 
over.  Let  us  see  what  conditions  are  required  for 
succeeding  to  an  office. 

There  can  only  be  succession  to  one  who,  whether 
by  deposition  or  by  death,  gives  up  and  leaves  his 
place  ;  whence  Our  Lord  is  always  head  and  sovereign 
Pontiff  of  the  Church,  to  whom  no  one  succeeds, 
because  he  is  always  living,  and  has  never  resigned 
or  quitted  this  priesthood  [or]  pontificate  ;  though  here 
below,  in  the  Church  militant,  he  partly  exercises  it 

*  Adv.  Jov.  i.  26.  t  See  Preface. 

278  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  11. 

by  his  ministers  and  servants,  his  authority,  how- 
ever, being  too  excellent  to  be  altogether  communi- 
cated. But  these  ministers  and  representatives,  as 
many  pastors  as  ever  there  are,  can  give  up  and  do 
give  up,  either  by  deposition  or  by  death,  their  offices 
and  dii^nities. 

Now  we  have  shown  that  S.  Peter  was  head  of  the 
Church  as  prime  minister  of  Christ,  and  that  this  office 
or  dignity  was  not  conferred  on  him  for  himself  alone, 
but  for  the  good  and  profit  of  the  whole  Church  ;  so 
that  Christianity  being  always  to  endure,  this  same 
charge  and  authority  must  be  perpetual  in  the  Church 
militant : — but  how  would  it  be  perpetual  if  S.  Peter 
had  no  successor  ?  For  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
S.  Peter  is  pastor  no  longer,  since  he  is  no  longer  in 
the  Church  militant,  nor  is  he  even  a  visible  man, 
which  is  a  condition  requisite  for  administration  in 
tlie  visible  Church. 

It  remains  to  learn  how  he  made  this  quittance, 
how  he  left  this  pontificate  of  his ; — whether  it  was 
by  laying  it  down  during  his  life  or  by  natural  death. 
Then  we  will  see  who  succeeded  him  and  by  what 

And  on  the  one  hand  nobody  doubts  that  S.  Peter 
continued  in  his  charge  all  his  life.  For  those  words 
of  Our  Lord :  Feed  my  sheep,  were  to  him  not  only 
an  institution  into  this  supreme  pastoral  charge,  but 
an  absolute  commandment,  which  had  no  other 
limitation  than  the  end  of  his  life,  any  more  than 
that  other :  Preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature^  which 
the  Apostles  laboured  in  until  death.  Whilst  there- 
fore S.  Peter  lived  this  mortal  life,  he  had  no  suc- 

*  Mark  nil. 

ART.  VI.  c.  IX,]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  279 

cesser, — he  did  not  lay  down  his  charge,  and  was 
not  deposed  from  it.  For  he  could  not  be  so  (except 
by  heresy,  which  never  had  access  to  the  Apostles, 
least  of  all  to  their  head)  unless  the  Master  of  the 
fold  had  removed  him,  which  was  not  done. 

It  was  death  then  which  removed  him  from  this 
guard  and  general  watch  which  he  was  keeping  as 
ordinary  pastor  over  the  whole  sheepfold  of  his 
Master.  But  who  succeeded  in  his  place  ?  As  to 
this,  all  antiquity  agrees  that  it  was  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  for  this  reason  that  S.  Peter  died  Bishop  of 
Rome — therefore  the  diocese  of  Rome  was  the  last 
seat  of  the  head  of  the  Church :  therefore  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  who  came  after  the  death  of  S.  Peter,  suc- 
ceeded to  the  head  of  the  Church,  and  consequently 
was  head  of  the  Church.  Some  one  might  say 
that  he  succeeded  the  head  of  the  Church  as  to  the 
bishopric  of  Rome,  but  not  as  to  the  kingship  of  the 
world.  But  such  a  one  must  show  that  S.  Peter  had 
two  sees,  of  which  the  one  was  for  Rome,  the  other 
for  the  universe,  which  was  not  the  case.  It  is  true 
that  he  had  a  seat  at  Antioch,  but  he  who  held  it 
after  him  had  not  the  Vicar-generalship,  because  S. 
Peter  lived  long  afterwards,  and  had  not  laid  down 
that  charge ;  but  having  chosen  Rome  for  his  see  he 
died  Bishop  thereof,  and  he  who  succeeded  him, 
succeeded  him  simply,  and  sat  in  his  seat,  which  was 
the  general  seat  over  the  whole  world,  and  over  the 
bishopric  of  Rome  in  particular.  Hence,  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  remained  general  lieutenant  in  the  Church, 
and  successor  of  S.  Peter.  This  I  am  now  about  to 
prove  so  solidly  that  only  the  obstinate  will  be  able 
to  doubt  it. 

2  8o  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth 


S.    PETER,    AND    HEAD    OF    THE    MILITANT    CHURCH. 

I  HAVE  presupposed  that  S.  Peter  was  Bishop  of 
Eome  and  died  such.  This  the  opposite  party 
deny ;  many  of  them  even  deny  that  he  ever  was 
at  Eome ;  but  I  am  not  obliged  to  attack  all  these 
negatives  in  detail,  because  when  I  shall  have  fully 
proved  that  S.  Peter  was  and  died  Bishop  of  Eome, 
I  shall  have  sufficiently  proved  that  the  Bishop  of 
Eome  is  the  successor  of  S.  Peter.  Besides,  all  my 
proofs  and  my  witnesses  state  in  express  terms  that 
the  Bishop  of  Eome  succeeded  to  S.  Peter,  which  is  my 
contention,  and  from  which  again  will  follow  a  clear 
certainty  that  S.  Peter  was  at  Eome  and  died  there. 

And  now  here  is  my  first  witness, — S.  Clement, 
disciple  of  S.  Peter,  in  the  first  letter  which  he  wrote 
to  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord ;  which  is  so 
authentic  that  Eufinus  became  the  translator  of  it 
about  twelve  hundred  years  ago.  Now  he  says  these 
words :  "  Simon  Peter,  the  chief  apostle,  brought  the 
King  of  ages  to  the  knowledge  of  the  city  of  Eome, 
that  it  also  might  be  saved.  He  being  inspired  with 
a  fatherly  affection,  taking  my  hand  in  the  assembly 
of  the  brethren,  said  :  I  ordain  this  Clement,  Bishop, 
to  whom  alone  I  commit  the  chair  of  my  preaching 
and  doctrine."  And  a  little  further  on:  "to  him  I 
deliver  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  which  was 
delivered  to  me  by  the  Lord."  And  as  to  the 
authority  of  this  epistle,  Damasus  in  the    Pontifical, 

ART.  vi.  0.  X.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  281 

in  the  life  of  Clement,  speaks  of  it  thus  :  "  In  the 
letter  which  was  written  to  James  you  will  find  how 
to  Clement  was  the  Church  committed  by  Blessed 
Peter."  And  Eufinus,  in  the  preface  to  the  book 
of  the  Recognitions  of  S.  Clement,  speaks  of  it  with 
great  honour,  and  says  that  he  had  turned  it  into 
Latin,  and  that  S.  Clement  bore  witness  in  it  to  his 
own  institution,  and  said  "  that  S.  Peter  had  left  him 
as  successor  in  his  chair."  This  testimony  shows  us 
both  that  S.  Peter  preached  at  Rome  and  that  he  was 
Bishop  there.  For  if  he  had  not  been  Bishop  how 
would  he  have  delivered  to  S.  Clement  a  chair  which 
he  would  not  have  held  there  ? 

The  second,  S.  Irenseus  (iii.  3)  :  "  To  the  greatest 
and  oldest  and  most  famous  Church,  founded  by  the 
two  most  glorious  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul."  And  a 
little  further  on :  "  The  blessed  Apostles  therefore, 
founding  and  instituting  the  Church,  delivered  to  Linus 
the  office  of  administering  it  as  Bishop  ;  to  him  suc- 
ceeded Anacletus ;  after  him,  in  the  third  place  from 
the  Apostles,  Clement  receives  the  episcopate. 

The  third,  Tertullian  (de  Pr.  xxxii.) :  "  The  Church 
also  of  the  Romans  publishes," — that  is,  shows  by 
public  instruments  and  proofs — "  that  Clement  was 
ordained  by  Peter."  And  in  the  same  book  (xxxvi.) : 
"  Happy  Church,  into  which  the  Apostles  poured  with 
their  blood  their  whole  doctrine  ! " — and  he  speaks 
of  the  Roman  Church,  "  where  Peter's  passion  is 
made  like  to  the  Lord's."  Whereby  you  see  that  S. 
Peter  died  at  Rome  and  instituted  S.  Clement  there. 
So  that  joining  this  testimony  to  the  others,  it  is 
seen  that  he  was  Bishop  there  and  died  teaching 

282  The  Catholic  Controversy,  (pakth. 

The  fourth,  S.  Cyprian  (Ep.  55,  ad  Corn.)  :  "They 
dare  to  sail  off  to  the  chair  of  Peter,  and  to  the  head 
Church,  whence  the  sacerdotal  unity  has  come  forth ; " 
— and  he  is  speaking  of  the  Eoman  Church. 

Eusebius  (Cliron.  ann.  44):  "Peter,  by  nation  a 
Galilsean,  the  first  pontiff  of  Christians,  having  first 
founded  the  Church  of  Antioch,  proceeds  to  Eome, 
where,  preaching  the  Gospel,  he  continues  twenty-five 
years  bishop  of  the  same  city." 

Epiphanius  (ii.  27) :  "The  succession  of  bishops  at 
Eome  is  in  this  order ;  Peter  and  Paul,  Linus,  Cletus, 
Clement,  &c." 

Dorotheus  (in  Syn.) :  "  Linus  was  Bishop  of  Eome 
after  the  first  ruler,  Peter." 

Optatus  of  Mile  vis  (de  Sch  Don.)  :  "  You  cannot 
deny  that  you  know  that  in  the  city  of  Eome  the 
episcopal  chair  was  first  intrusted  to  Peter,  in  which 
Peter,  head  of  all  the  Apostles,  sat."  And  a  little 
further  on  :  "  Peter  sat  first,  to  whom  succeeded  Linus, 
to  Linus  succeeded  Clement." 

S.  Jerome  (ad  Dam.)  :  "  With  the  successor  of  the 
fisherman  and  the  disciple  of  the  cross  do  I  treat :  I 
am  united  in  communion  with  thy  Blessedness,  in  the 
chair  of  Peter." 

S.  Augustine  (Ep.  53,  ad  Gen.):  "To  Peter  suc- 
ceeded Linus,  to  Linus  Clement." 

In  the  Fourth  General  Council  of  Chalcedon  (Act. 
iii.),  when  the  legates  of  the  Holy  See  would  deliver 
sentence  against  Dioscorus,  tliey  speak  in  this  fashion  : 
"  Wherefore,  most  holy  and  blessed  Leo,  of  the  great  and 
older  Eome,  by  us  and  by  the  present  holy  synod, 
together  with  the  thrice  blessed  and  ever  to  be  praised 
Apostle  Peter,  who  is  the  rock  and  the  foundation  of 

ART.  VI.  ex.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  283 

the  Catholic  Church,  has  stripped  him  of  the  episcopal 
dignity  and  also  ejected  him  from  the  priestly  ministry." 
Give  a  little  attention  to  these  particulars ;  that  the 
Bishop  of  Eome  alone  deprives  him,  by  his  legates 
and  by  the  Council;  that  they  unite  the  Bishop  of 
Eome  with  S.  Peter.  For  such  things  show  that  the 
Bishop  of  Eome  holds  the  place  of  S.  Peter. 

The  Synod  of  Alexandria,  at  which  Athanasius  was 
present,  in  its  letter  to  Felix  II.,  uses  remarkable 
words  on  this  point,  and  amongst  other  things,  relates 
that  in  the  Council  of  Nice  it  had  been  determined 
that  it  was  not  lawful  to  celebrate  any  Council  without 
the  consent  of  the  Holy  See  of  Eome,  but  that  the 
canons  which  had  been  made  to  that  effect  had  been 
burnt  by  the  Arian  heretics.  And  in  fact,  Julius  I., 
in  the  Rescript  against  the  Orientals  in  Favour  of 
Athanasius  (cc.  2,  3),  cites  two  canons  of  the  Council 
of  Mce  which  relate  to  this  matter, — which  work  of 
Julius  I.  has  been  cited  by  Gratian,  four  hundred  years 
ago,  and  by  Isidore  nine  hundred  :  and  the  great  Father, 
Vincent  of  Lerius,  makes  mention  of  it  a  thousand  years 
back.  I  say  this  because  all  the  canons  of  Nice  are 
not  in  existence,  only  twenty  remaining  :  but  so  many 
grave  authors  cite  others  beyond  the  twenty,  that  we 
are  obliged  to  believe  what  is  said  by  those  good 
Fathers  of  Alexandria  above-named,  that  the  Arians 
have  got  the  greater  part  destroyed. 

For  God's  sake  let  us  cast  our  eyes  on  that  most 
ancient  and  pure  Church  of  the  first  six  centuries,  and 
regard  it  from  all  sides.  And  if  we  find  it  firmly 
believes  that  the  Pope  was  successor  of  S.  Peter,  what 
rashness  will  it  be  to  deny  it  ? 

This,  methinks,  is  a  reason  which  asks  no  credit. 

284  T^^^  Catholic  Controversy.  lpartil 

but  pays  in  good  coin.  S.  Peter  has  had  successors  in 
his  vicarship  :  and  who  has  ever  in  the  ancient  Church 
had  the  reputation  of  being  successor  of  S.  Peter,  and 
head  of  the  Church,  except  the  Bishop  of  Kome  ?  In 
truth  all  ancient  authors,  whosoever  they  be,  all  give 
this  title  to  the  Pope,  and  never  to  others. 

And  how  then  shall  we  say  it  does  not  belong  to 
him  ?  Truly  it  were  to  deny  the  known  truth.  Or 
let  them  tell  us  what  other  bishop  is  the  head  of  the 
Church,  and  successor  of  S.  Peter.  At  the  Council  of 
Nice,  at  those  of  Constantinople  and  Chalcedon,  it  is 
not  seen  that  any  bishop  usurps  the  primacy  for  him- 
self :  it  is  attributed,  according  to  ancient  custom,  to 
the  Pope ;  no  other  is  named  in  equal  degree.  In 
short,  never  was  it  said,  either  certainly  or  doubtfully, 
of  any  bishop  in  the  first  five  hundred  years  that  he 
was  head  or  superior  over  the  rest,  except  of  the 
Bishop  of  Eome ;  about  him  indeed  it  was  never 
doubted,  but  was  held  as  settled  that  he  was  such. 
On  what  ground,  then,  after  fifteen  hundred  years 
passed,  would  one  cast  doubt  on  this  ancient  tradition  ? 
I  should  never  end  were  I  to  try  to  catalogue  all 
the  assurances  and  repetitions  of  this  truth  which  we 
have  in  the  Ancients'  writings :  but  this  will  suffice 
just  now  to  prove  that  the  Bishop  of  Eome  is  the 
successor  of  S.  Peter,  and  that  S.  Peter  was  and  died 
Bishop  at  Eome. 

ABT.  VI.  c.  XL]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  285 



There  is  no  question  which  the  ministers  fight  over  so 
pertinacioiisly  as  this.  For  they  try  by  force  of  con- 
jectures, presumptions,  dilemmas,  explanations,  and  by 
every  means,  to  prove  that  S.  Peter  was  never  at 
Eome : — except  Calvin,  who,  seeing  that  this  was  to 
belie  all  antiquity,  and  that  it  was  not  needed  for  his 
opinion,  contents  himself  with  saying  that  at  least  S. 
Peter  was  not  long  Bishop  at  Rome :  "  On  account  of 
the  consent  of  writers,  I  do  not  dispute  that  he  was  at 
Eome.  But  that  he  was  bishop,  especially  for  a  long 
time,  I  cannot  admit."  But  in  truth,  though  he  were 
Bishop  of  Eome  for  but  a  very  short  time,  if  he  died 
there  he  left  there  his  chair  and  his  succession.  So 
that  as  to  Calvin  we  should  not  have  great  cause  for 
discussion,  provided  that  he  was  resolved  to  acknow- 
ledge sincerely  that  S.  Peter  died  at  Eome,  and  that 
he  was  bishop  there  when  he  died.  And  as  to  tha 
others  we  have  sufficiently  proved  above  that  S.  Peter 
died  Bishop  of  Eome. 

The  statements  which  are  made  to  the  contrary  are 
more  captious  than  hard  to  resolve;  and  because  he 
who  shall  have  the  true  account  of  the  life  of  S.  Peter 
before  his  eyes  will  have  enough  answer  for  all  the 
objections,  I  will  briefly  say  what  I  think  the  more 
probable,  in  which  I  will  follow  the  opinion  of  that 
excellent  theologian,  Gilbert  Genebrard,  Archbishop  of 
Aix,   in   his    Chronology^    and   of  Eobert   Bellarmine, 

286  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  n. 

Jesuit,    in    his    Controversies,   who    closely   follow    S. 
Jerome,  and  Eusebius  in  Chronico. 

Our  Lord  then  ascended  into  heaven  in  the  eighteenth 
year  of  Tiberius,  and  commanded  his  Apostles  to 
stay  in  Jerusalem  twelve  years,  according  to  the 
ancient  tradition  of  Thraseas,  martyr,  not  all  indeed 
but  some  of  them  (to  verify  the  word  spoken  by 
Isaias,*  and  as  SS.  Paul  and  Barnabas  seem  to  imply  t), 
for  S.  Peter  was  in  Lydda  and  in  Joppa  before  the 
twelve  years  had  expired : — it  was  enough  that  some 
Apostles  should  remain  in  Judsea  as  witnesses  to  the 
Jews.  S.  Peter  then  remained  in  Judaea  about  five 
years  after  the  Ascension,  preaching  and  announcing 
the  Gospel,  and  at  the  end  of  the  first  year,  or  soon 
afterwards,  S.  Paul  was  converted,  who  after  three 
years  went  to  Jerusalem  to  see  Peter,  |  with  whom  he 
stayed  fifteen  days.  S.  Peter  then  having  preached 
about  five  years  in  Judaea,  towards  the  end  of  the 
fifth  year  went  to  Antioch,  where  he  remained  Bishop 
about  seven  years,  that  is,  till  the  second  year  of 
Claudius,  but  meanwhile  making  evangelic  journeys 
into  Galatia,  Asia,  Cappadocia,  and  elsewhere,  for  the 
conversion  of  the  nations.  From  thence,  having  com- 
mitted his  episcopal  charge  to  the  good  Evodius,  he 
returned  to  Jerusalem,  on  his  arrival  in  which  place 
he  was  imprisoned  by  Herod  to  please  the  Jews  §  about 
the  time  of  the  Passover.  But  escaping  from  the 
prison  soon  afterwards  under  the  direction  of  the 
angel,  he  came,  that  same  year,  which  was  the  second 
of  Claudius,  to  Eome,  where  he  established  his  chair, 
which  he  held  about  twenty-five  years,  during  which 
he  did  not  omit  to  visit  various  provinces,  according 

*  Ixv.  t  Acts  xiii.  46.  X  Gal.  i.  18.  §  Acts  xii,  6, 

ART.  VT.  c.  XI.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  287 

to  the  necessity  of  the  Christian  commonwealth  ;  but 
amongst  other  things,  about  the  eighteenth  year  of  the 
Passion  and  Ascension  of  the  Saviour,  which  was  the 
ninth  of  Claudius,  he  was  driven  with  the  rest  of  the 
Hebrews  from  Eome,  and  went  away  to  Jerusalem, 
where  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  was  celebrated,  in 
which  S.  Peter  presided.  Then  Claudius  being  dead, 
S.  Peter  returned  to  Eome,  taking  up  again  his  first 
work  of  teaching  and  of  visiting  from  time  to  time 
various  provinces,  where  at  last  Nero,  having  im- 
prisoned him  for  death,  with  S.  Paul  his  companion, 
Peter,  yielding  to  the  holy  importunities  of  the  faithful, 
was  about  to  make  his  escape  and  get  out  of  the  city 
by  night,  when  meeting  Our  Saviour  by  the  gate 
he  said  to  him :  Domine  quo  vaclis  ? — Lord,  whither 
goest  thou  ?  He  answered :  I  go  to  Eome  to  be 
crucified  anew :  *  an  answer  which  S.  Peter  well 
knew  pointed  towards  his  cross.  So  that,  after  having 
been  about  five  years  in  Judaea,  seven  years  in  Antioch, 
twenty-five  years  at  Eome,  in  the  fourteenth  year  of 
Nero's  empire  he  was  crucified,  head  downwards,  and 
on  the  same  day  S.  Paul  had  his  head  cut  off. 

But  before  dying,  taking  by  the  hand  his  dis- 
ciple S.  Clement,  S.  Peter  appointed  him  his  suc- 
cessor, an  office  which  S.  Clement  would  not  accept 
nor  exercise  till  after  the  death  of  Linus  and  of 
Cletus,  who  had  been  coadjutors  of  S.  Peter  in  the 
administration  of  the  Eoman  bishopric.  So  that  to 
him  who  would  know  why  some  authors  place  S. 
Clement  first  in  order  after  S.  Peter,  and  others  S. 
Linus,  I  will  make  him  an  answer  by  S.  Epiphanius, 

*  Amb.  contra  Aiix.  ;  Origen  iu  Gen.  iii ;  Athan.  pro  fugd  ;  Jeroma 
de  Vir.  ill.  ;  Eusebius  in  Chron  ;  Ado  j  Tertull.  de  ^rcescr. 

288  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

an  author  worthy  of  credit,  whose  words  are  these :  * 
"  Let  no  man  wonder  that  Linus  and  Cletus  took  up 
the  episcopate  before  S.  Clement,  he  being  a  disciple 
of  the  Apostles,  contemporary  with  Peter  and  Paul ; 
for  they  also  were  contemporaries  of  the  Apostles ; 
whether  therefore  whilst  they  were  alive  he  received 
from  Peter  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  episco- 
pate, and  refusing  the  office  waited,  or,  after  the 
departure  of  the  Apostles  was  appointed  by  the  bishop 
Cletus,  we  do  not  clearly  know." 

Because  therefore  S.  Clement  had  been  chosen  by  S. 
Peter,  as  he  himself  testifies,  and  yet  would  not  accept 
the  charge  before  the  death  of  Linus  and  Cletus, 
some,  in  consideration  of  the  election  made  by  S. 
Peter,  place  him  the  first  in  order,  others,  looking  at 
the  refusal  he  gave  and  at  his  leaving  the  exercise  of 
it  to  Linus  and  Cletus,  place  him  the  fourth. 

Besides,  S.  Epiphanius  may  have  had  reason  to 
doubt  about  the  election  of  S.  Clement  made  by  S. 
Peter,  for  want  of  having  had  sufficient  proofs ;  while 
possibly  Tertnllian,  Damasus,  Eufinus,  and  others 
may  have  had  means  of  ascertaining  the  truth ;  and 
this  may  be  the  reason  why  S.  Epiphanius  speaks  thus 
indecisively.  Tertullian,  who  was  more  ancient,  states 
positively :  "  The  Church  of  the  Eomans  publishes 
that  Clement  was  ordained  by  Peter,"  that  is,  proves 
by  documents  and  public  acts.  As  for  myself  I  prefer, 
and  reasonably,  to  place  myself  on  the  side  of  those 
who  are  certain ;  because  he  who  doubts  what  a  man 
of  probity  and  sense  distinctly  certifies  contradicts  the 
speaker;  on  the  contrary,  to  be  sure  of  that  which 
another   doubts   about   is   simply   to   imply   that   the 

*  Hser.  27. 

ART.  VI.  c.  XL]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  289 

doubter  does  not  know  all,  as  indeed  he  has  first  con- 
fessed himself,  by  doubting, — for  doubting  is  nothing 
but  not  certainly  knowing  the  truth  of  a  thing. 

And  now,  having  seen  by  this  short  account  of  the 
life  of  S.  Peter,  which  bears  every  mark  of  probability, 
that  S.  Peter  did  not  always  stay  in  Eome,  but,  having 
his  chair  there,  did  not  omit  to  visit  many  provinces, 
to  return  to  Jerusalem  and  to  fulfil  the  apostolic  ofiice, 
all  those  frivolous  reasons  which  are  drawn  from  the 
negative  authority  of  the  Epistle  of  S.  Paul  will  no 
longer  have  entrance  into  your  judgments.  For  if 
it  be  said  that  S.  Paul,  writing  to  Eome  and  from 
Eome,  has  made  no  mention  of  S.  Peter,  we  need  not 
be  surprised,  for,  perhaps,  he  was  not  there  at  that 

So,  it  is  quite  oertain  that  the  First  Epistle  of  S. 
Peter  was  written  from  Eome,  as  S.  Jerome  witnesses  :  * 
"Peter,"  says  he,  "in  his  first  Epistle,  figuratively 
signifying  Eome  under  the  name  of  Babylon,  says : 
"  The  Church  which  is  in  Babylon,  elected  together,  saluteth 
you."  This  that  most  ancient  man  Papias,  a  disciple 
of  the  Apostles,  had  previously  attested,  as  Eusebius 
records.  But  would  this  consequence  be  good — S. 
Peter,  in  that  Epistle,  gives  no  sign  that  S.  Paul  was 
with  him,  therefore  Paul  was  never  in  Eome  ?  This 
Epistle  does  not  contain  everything,  and  if  it  does  not 
say  that  he  was  there,  it  also  does  not  say  that  he 
was  not.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  not  there  then, 
or  that  if  he  were  it  was  not  expedient  to  name  him 
in  that  place  for  some  reason.  I  say  the  same  of  S. 
Paul's  letter. 

Lastly,  to  adjust  the  times  of  the  life  of  S.  Peter  to 


*  De  Vir.  III. 


290  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

the  reigns  of  Tiberius,  Caius  Caligula,  and  Nero,  we 
can  lay  them  out  something  in  this  fashion.  In  the 
eighteenth  year  of  Tiberius,  Our  Lord  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  Tiberius  survived  Our  Lord  in  this  world 
about  six  years ;  five  years  after  the  Ascension,  in  the 
last  year  of  the  Empire  of  Tiberius,  S.  Peter  came  to 
Antioch,  where  having  stayed  about  seven  years — that 
is,  what  remained  of  Tiberius,  four  years  of  Caius 
Caligula,  and  two  of  Claudius — towards  the  end  of  the 
second  of  Claudius  he  came  to  Eome,  where  he  re- 
mained seven  years,  that  is,  till  the  ninth  of  Claudius, 
when  the  Jews  were  driven  out  of  Eome,  which  caused 
S.  Peter  to  withdraw  into  Judsea.  About  five  years 
afterwards,  Claudius  being  dead  in  the  fourteenth 
year  of  his  reign,  S.  Peter  returned  to  Eome,  where 
he  stayed  till  the  fourteenth  and  last  year  of  Nero. 
This  makes  about  thirty-seven  years  that  S.  Peter 
lived  after  the  death  of  his  Master,  of  which  he  lived 
twelve  partly  in  Judaea  partly  in  Antioch,  and  twenty- 
five  he  lived  as  Bishop  of  Eome. 



Hear  in  few  words  what  the  Ancients  thought  of 
this  matter,  and  in  what  rank  they  held  the  Bishop 
of  Eome.  This  is  the  way  they  speak,  whether  of  the 
See  of  Eome  and  its  Church,  whether  of  the  Pope: 
for  all  comes  to  the  same. 

ART.  VI.  c.  XII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith. 


Chair  of  Peter         .... 

Principal  Church  .... 
Commencement  of  sacerdotal  unity 
Bond  of  unity :  sublime  summit  of 

the  priesthood 
Church  in  which  is  the  superior 

authority     .... 
Root  and  matrix  of  the  Church 
Seat  on  -which  our  Lord  established 

the  whole  Church 
Hinge  and  head  of  all  Churches 

Eefuge  of  bishops   . 

Supreme  Apostolic  seat  . 
Head  of  the  pastoral  honour  . 
Supremacy  of  the  Apostolic  chair 

Principal  dignity  of  the  Apostolic 
priesthood    .... 

Head  of  all  Churches 

Head  of  the  world,  of  the  universe 
by  religion    .... 

Set  over  the  rest  of  the  Churches 

The  presiding  Church     . 

The  first  see  to  be  judged  by  no  one 

First  seat  of  all       .        .        . 

Most  safe  harbour  of  Catholic  com 
munion         .... 

Apostolic  fountain  . 

Thus  do  they  name  the 
how  they  style  the  Pope. 

Bishop  of  the  most  holy  Catholic 

Most  holy  and  most  blessed  Patri- 

{  Cyp.    Lib.  i.,    Ep.  3  [Editio 
/      Erasmi]. 

lb.  55  [ad  Corn.] 

lb.  iii.  13. 

lb.  iv.  2. 

Iren.  iii.  3. 

Cyp.  iv.  8. 

Anac.  Ep.  i,  ad  omnes  Episc, 

lb.  3. 

Marcellus,   Ep.    i,   ad  Episc. 

Antic  ch. 
Syn.  Alex.  Ep.  ad  Pel.  ubi  Ath. 
Prosper  de  Ingratis  [lin.  40]. 
Aug.  Ep,  162  [Migne  43]. 
Prosper  de  Voc.  Gen.  ii.  16.    In 

prsef.  Cone.  Chal. ;  Valent, 

Victor  Ut.  de  persec.  Van.  ii.  ; 

Justinianus  de  summa  Trin. 
Leo  M.  in  Nat.  SS.  P.  et  P. ; 

Prosper  de  Ingratis. 
Syn.  Rom.  sub  Gelasio. 
Ign.  ad  Rom.  in  inscriptione. 
Syn.  Sinuessana  300  Episc. 
Leo  Ep.  61  [ad  Theod.] 

I  Hieron.  Ep.  16. 

I  Innoc.  ad  Patres  Milev.  inter 
<  Epist.  S.  Auf.  93  [Migne 
(      182]. 

Eoman  Church ;  now  see 

I  Cyp.  iii.  II. 
Cone.  Chalc. ,  Act  iii. 

This  passage  is  from  S.  Siricius,  Ep.  i,  ad  Himer.     [Tr.] 


The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

Head  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon . 

Head  of  the  Universal  Church 

Most  blessed  Lord ;  elevated  to 
the  Apostolic  Dignity  ;  father  of 
fathers  ;  supreme  pontiff  of  all 

High  Priest 

Prince  of  Priests      .        ,        .        .  < 

Ruler  of  the  house  of  the  Lord 

Guardian  of  the  Lord's  vineyard    . 

Vicar  of  Christ        .... 

Confirmer  of  the  brethren 

Great  priest ;  supreme  pontiff  ;'^ 
prince  of  bishops ;  heir  of  the 
Apostles  ;  Abel  in  primacy  ;  Noe 
in  government;  Abraham  in  pat- 
riarchate ;  Melchisedech  in  order ; 
Aaron  in  dignity ;  Moses  in  au 
thority  ;  Samuel  in  judgment ; 
Peter  in  authority ;  Christ  in 
unction  ;  shepherd  of  the  Lord's 
fold ;  key-bearer  of  the  Lord's 
house ;  shepherd  of  all  shepherds ; 
called  in  plenitude  of  power.        / 

In  relatione. 
Ibid.  xvi. 

Steph.  Episc.  Carthag.  in  Ep. 
ad  Damas.  nomine  Cono. 

Hieron.  Prsef.  Evang.  ad  Dam. 
Id  testatur  tota  antiq.  apud 

Valent.    ep.    ad    Theodos. 

initio.  Cone.  Chalc. 
Amb.  in  i  Tim.  iii. 
Cone.  Chalc.  ep.  ad  Leon. 

Cy.  i.  3. 
Bern.  Ep.  190. 

.  )  lb.  de  Consid.  11.  8. 

I  should  never  end  if  I  tried  to  heap  together  all 
the  titles  which  the  Ancients  have  given  to  the 
Holy  See  of  Eome  and  to  its  Bishop.  The  above 
ought  to  suffice  to  make  even  the  most  perverse  wits 
see  the  extravagant  lie  which  Beza  continues  to  tell 
after  his  master  Calvin,  in  his  treatise  On  the  Marks 
of  the  Church,  where  he  says  that  Phocas  was  the 
first  to  give  authority  to  the  Bishop  of  Eome  over 
the  rest,  and  to  place  him  in  Primacy. 

What  is  the  use  of  uttering  so  gross  a  lie  ?  Phocas 
lived  in  the  time  of  S.  Gregory  the  Great,  and  every 
one  of  the   authors  I  have  cited  is   earlier  than   S. 

ART.  VI.  c.  XII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  293 

Gregory,  except  S.  Bernard,  whom  I  have  quoted,  from 
his  books  On  Consideration,  because  Calvin  holds  these 
so  true  that  he  considers  truth  itself  has  spoken  in 

It  is  objected  that  S.  Gregory  would  not  let 
himself  be  called  Universal  Bishop.  But  universal 
Bishop  may  be  understood  of  one  who  is  in  such  sort 
bishop  of  the  universe  that  the  other  bishops  are  only 
vicars  and  substitutes, — which  is  not  the  case.  For 
the  bishops  are  truly  spiritual  princes,  chiefs  and 
pastors ;  not  lieutenants  of  the  Pope,  but  of  Our  Lord, 
who  therefore  calls  them  brethren.  Or  the  word  may 
be  understood  of  one  who  is  superintendent  over  all, 
and  in  regard  of  whom  all  the  others  who  are  super- 
intendents in  particular  are  inferiors  indeed  but  not 
vicars  or  substitutes.  And  it  is  in  this  sense  that  the 
Ancients  have  called  him  Universal  Bishop,  while 
S.  Gregory  denies  it  in  the  other  sense. 

They  object  the  Council  of  Carthage,  which  forbids 
that  any  one  shall  call  himself  Prince  of  Priests ; 
but  it  is  for  want  of  something  to  go  on  with  that 
they  put  this  in : — for  who  is  ignorant  that  this  was 
a  provincial  Council  affecting  the  bishops  of  that  Pro- 
vince, in  which  the  Bishop  of  Eome  was  not; — the 
Mediterranean  Sea  lies  between  them. 

There  remained  the  name  of  Pope,  which  I  have 
kept  for  the  ending  of  this  part  of  my  subject,  and 
which  is  the  ordinary  one  by  which  we  call  the 
Bishop  of  Eome.     This  name  was  common  to  bishops ; 

*  In  the  \&t  title  of  the  Fdbrian  Code,  the  Saint  gives  as  a  further 
reason  why  he  dwells  on  the  testimony  of  S.  Bernard  the  fact  that 
Calvin  and  others  have  put  him  forward  as  au  adversary  of  papal 
supremacy.     [Tr.] 

294  '^^^  Catholic  Controversy,  [partil 

witness  S.  Jerome,  who  thus  styles  S.  Augustine  in 
an  Epistle :  *  "  May  the  Almighty  keep  thee  safe, 
Lord,  truly  holy  and  reverend  pope."  But  it  has 
been  made  particular  to  the  Pope  by  excellence,  on 
account  of  the  universality  of  his  charge,  whence  he 
is  called  in  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  Universal  Pope, 
and  simply  Pope,  without  addition  or  limitation. 
And  this  word  means  nothing  more  than  chief  father 
or  grandfather.  Papos  aviasque  trementes  anteferunt 
patrihus  seri  novd  curd  nepotes.i 

And  that  you  may  know  how  ancient  this  name 
is  amongst  good  men — [hear]  S.  Ignatius,  disciple  of  the 
Apostles:  "When  thou  wast,"  says  he,  "at  Eome  with 
Pope  Linus."  J  Already  at  that  time  there  were 
papists,  and  of  what  sort ! 

We  call  him  His  Holiness,  and  we  find  that  S. 
Jerome  already  called  him  by  the  same  name :  § 
"  I  beseech  thy  Blessedness,  by  the  cross,  &c.  .  .  . 
I  following  Christ  alone  am  joined  in  communion 
with  thy  Blessedness,  that  is,  the  chair  of  Peter." 
We  call  him  Holy  Father,  but  you  have  seen  that 
S.  Jerome  so  calls  S.  Augustine. 

For  the  rest,  those  who,  explaining  chapter  ii.  of 
the  2d  of  Thessalonians,  to  make  you  believe  the  Pope 
is  Antichrist,  may  have  told  you  that  he  makes  himself 
be  called  God  on  earth,  or  Son  of  God,  are  the  greatest 
liars  in  the  world :  for  so  far  are  the  popes  from 
taking  any  ambitious  title,  that  from  the  time  of  S. 
Gregory  they  have  for  the  most  part  called  themselves 

*  97. 

t  "  Late  born  grandsons,  reversing  the  ordinary  rule,  cherish  their 
trembling  grandsires  and  grandames  more  than  their  parents." — 
Ausonius  ad  nep. 

t  Ad  Mariani  Zarbensem.  §  Ad  Dam,  ep.  15. 

ART.  VI.  0.  XIII.]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  295 

Servants  of  the  servants  of  God.  Never  have  they 
called  themselves  by  such  names  as  you  say  except 
in  the  ordinary  acceptation,  as  every  one  can  be  if 
he  keep  the  commandments  of  God,  according  to  the 
power  given  to  them  that  believe  in  his  name  (John  i.) 
Rightly  indeed  might  those  call  themselves  children 
of  the  devil  who  lie  so  foully  as  do  your  ministers. 


OUGHT    TO    BE    HELD. 

It  is  certainly  not  without  mystery  that  often  in  the 
Gospel  where  there  is  occasion  for  the  Apostles  in 
general  to  speak,  S.  Peter  alone  speaks  for  all.  In 
S.  John  (vi.)  it  was  he  who  said  for  all :  Lord,  to 
whom  shall  we  go  ?  Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal 
life.  And  we  have  believed  and  have  known  that  thou 
art  the  Christ  the  Son  of  God.  It  was  he,  in  S. 
Matthew  (xvi.),  who  in  the  name  of  all  made  that 
noble  confession :  Thou  art  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God.  He  asked  for  all :  Behold  we  have  left  all 
things,  &c.  (Matt,  xxvii.)  In  S.  Luke  (xii.) :  Lord,  dost 
thou  speak  this  parable  to  lis,  or  likewise  to  all  ? 

It   is  usual   that  the   head  should   speak  for   the 
whole  body  ;  and  what   the  head  says  is  considered 
to  be  said  by  all  the  rest.     Do  you  not  see  that  in 
the  election  of  S.  Matthias  it  is  he  alone  whcr 'speak$^- 
and  determines  ?  ^a^xS  ^     "  "- 

296  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [paeth. 

The  Jews  asked  all  the  Apostles  :  Wliai  shall  we  do, 
men  and  brethren  (Acts,  ii.)  ?  S.  Peter  alone  answers  for 
all :  Do  penance,  &c.  And  it  is  for  this  reason  that 
S.  Chrysostom  and  Origen  have  called  him  "  the 
mouth  and  the  crown  of  the  Apostles,"  as  we  saw 
above,  because  he  was  accustomed  to  speak  for  all 
the  Apostles ;  and  the  same  S.  Chrysostom  calls  him 
"  the  mouth  of  Christ,"  because  what  he  says  for  the 
whole  Church  and  to  the  whole  Church  as  head  and 
pastor,  is  not  so  much  a  word  of  man  as  of  Our  Lord : 
Amen,  I  say  to  you  he  that  receiveth  whomsoever  1  send 
receiveth  me  (John  xiii.).  Therefore  what  he  said  and 
determined  could  not  be  false.  And  truly  if  the  con- 
firmer  be  fallen,  have  not  all  the  rest  fallen  ? — if  the 
confirmer  fall  or  totter,  who  shall  confirm  him  ? — if  the 
confirmer  be  not  firm  and  steady,  when  the  others 
grow  weak  who  shall  strengthen  them  ?  For  it  is 
written  that  if  the  blind  lead  the  blind  both  shall  fall 
into  the  ditch,  and  if  the  unsteady  and  the  feeble  would 
hold  up  and  support  the  feeble,  they  shall  both  come 
to  ground.  So  that  Our  Lord,  giving  authority  and 
command  to  Peter  to  confirm  the  others,  has  in  like 
proportion  given  him  the  power  and  the  means  to  do 
this ;  otherwise  vainly  would  he  have  commanded 
things  that  were  impossible.  Now  in  order  to  con- 
firm the  others  and  to  strengthen  the  weak,  one  must 
not  be  subject  to  weakness  oneself,  but  be  solid  and 
fixed  as  a  true  stone  and  a  rock.  Such  was  S.  Peter, 
in  so  far  as  he  was  Pastor-general  and  governor  of  the 

So  when  S.  Peter  was  placed  as  foundation  of  the 
Church,  and  the  Church  was  certified  that  the  gates 
of   hell  should   not   prevail   against   it, — was   it   not 

ART.  VI.  c.  XIII.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  297 

enough  to  say  that  S.  Peter,  as  foundation-stone  of 
the  ecclesiastical  government  and  administration,  could 
not  be  crushed  and  broken  by  infidelity  or  error, 
which  is  the  principal  gate  of  hell  ?  For  who  knows 
not  that  if  the  foundation  be  overthrown,  if  that  can 
be  sapped,  the  whole  building  falls.  In  the  same  way, 
if  the  supreme  acting  shepherd  can  conduct  his  sheep 
into  venomous  pastures,  it  is  clearly  visible  that  the 
flock  is  soon  to  be  lost.  For  if  the  supreme  acting 
shepherd  leads  out  of  the  path,  who  will  put  him 
right  ?  if  he  stray,  who  will  bring  him  back  ? 

In  truth,  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  follow  him 
simply,  not  guide  him  ;  otherwise  the  sheep  would  be 
shepherds.  And  indeed  the  Church  cannot  always  be 
united  in  General  Council,  and  during  the  first  three 
centuries  none  were  held.  In  the  difficulties  then 
which  daily  arise,  to  whom  could  one  better  address 
oneself,  from  whom  could  one  take  a  safer  law,  a 
surer  rule,  than  from  the  general  head,  and  from  the 
vicar  of  Our  Lord  ?  Now  all  this  has  not  only  been 
true  of  S.  Peter,  but  also  of  his  successors;  for  the 
cause  remaining  the  effect  remains  likewise.  The 
Church  has  always  need  of  an  infallible  *  confirmer, 
to  whom  she  can  appeal ;  of  a  foundation  which  the 
gates  of  hell,  and  principally  error,  cannot  overthrow  ; 
and  has  always  need  that  her  pastor  should  be  unable 
to  lead  her  children  into  error.  The  successors,  then, 
of  S.  Peter  all  have  these  same  privileges,  which  do 
not  follow  the  person  but  the  dignity  and  public 

S.    Bernard    calls    the    Pope    another    "  Moses    in 

*  Here  the  French  editor  had  substituted  permanent  for  infallible. 

298  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  11. 

authority."  Now  how  great  the  authority  of  Moses 
was  every  one  knows.  For  he  sat  and  judged  con- 
cerning all  the  differences  amongst  the  people,  and  all 
difficulties  which  occurred  in  the  service  of  God :  he 
appointed  judges  for  affairs  of  slight  importance,  but  the 
great  doubts  were  reserved  for  his  cognizance :  if  God 
would  speak  to  the  people,  it  is  by  his  mouth  and 
using  him  as  a  medium.  So  then  the  supreme  pastor 
of  the  Church  is  competent  and  sufficient  judge  for 
us  in  all  our  greatest  difficulties ;  otherwise  we  should 
be  in  worse  condition  than  that  ancient  people  who 
had  a  tribunal  to  which  they  might  appeal  for  the 
resolution  of  their  doubts,  particularly  in  religious 
matters.  And  if  any  one  would  reply  that  Moses  was 
not  a  priest,  nor  an  ecclesiastical  pastor,  I  would  send 
him  back  to  what  I  have  said  above  on  this  point.  For 
it  would  be  tedious  to  make  these  repetitions. 

In  Deuteronomy  (xvii.) :  Thou  shalt  do  whatsoever 
they  shall  say  that  preside  in  the  place  which  the  Lord 
shall  choose,  and  what  they  shall  teach  thee  according  to 
his  law  :  neither  shalt  thou  decline  to  the  right  hand 
nor  to  the  left  hand.  But  he  that  shall  he  proud,  and 
refuse  to  ohey  the  commandment  of  the  priest  .  .  .  that 
man  shall  die.  What  will  you  say  to  this  necessity 
of  accepting  the  judgment  of  the  sovereign  pontiff  ? — 
that  one  was  obliged  to  accept  that  judgment  which 
was  according  to  the  law,  not  any  other  ?  Yes,  but 
in  this  it  was  needful  to  follow  the  sentence  of  the 
priest ;  otherwise,  if  one  had  not  followed  it  but  had 
examined  into  it,  it  would  have  been  vain  to  have 
gone  to  him,  and  the  difficulty  and  doubt  would  never 
have  been  settled.  Therefore  it  is  said  simply :  He 
that  shall  he  proud,  and  refuse  to  ohey  the  commandment 

ART.  VI.  0.  XIII.]       The  Rule  of  Faith,  299 

of  the  priest  and  the  decree  of  the  judge  shall  die.  And 
in  Malachy  (ii.  7) :  The  lips  of  the  priest  shall  keep 
knowledge ;  and  they  shall  seek  the  law  at  his  mouth. 
Whence  it  follows  that  not  everybody  could  answer 
himself  in  religious  matters,  nor  bring  forward  the 
law  after  his  own  fancy,  but  must  do  so  according  as 
the  pontiff  laid  it  down.  Now  if  God  had  such  great 
providence  over  the  religion  and  peace  of  conscience 
of  the  Jews  as  to  establish  for  them  a  supreme  judge 
in  whose  sentence  they  were  bound  to  acquiesce,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  he  has  provided  Christianity  with  a 
pastor,  who  has  this  same  authority,  to  remove  the 
doubts  and  scruples  which  might  arise  concerning  the 
declarations  of  the  Scriptures. 

And  if  the  High  Priest  wore  on  his  breast  the 
Eational  of  judgment  (Ex.  xxviii.),  in  which  were  the 
Urim  and  the  Thummim,  doctrine  and  truth,  as  some 
interpret  them,  or  illuminations  and  perfections,  as 
others  say  (which  is  almost  the  same  thing,  since 
perfection  consists  in  truth  and  doctrine  is  only 
illumination) — shall  we  suppose  that  the  High  Priest 
of  the  New  Law  has  not  also  the  efficacy  of  them  ? 
In  truth,  all  that  was  given  out  and  out  to  the  ancient 
Church,  and  to  the  servant  Agar,  has  been  given  in 
much  better  form  to  Sara  and  to  the  Spouse.  Our 
High  Priest  then  still  has  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim 
on  his  breast. 

Now  whether  this  doctrine  and  truth  were  nothing 
but  these  two  words  inscribed  on  the  Eational,  as  S. 
Augustine  seems  to  think  and  Hugh  of  S.  Victor 
maintains,  or  whether  they  were  the  name  of  God,  as 
Rabbi  Solomon  asserts  according  to  Vatablus  and 
Augustine   bishop   of  Eugubium,    or   whether  it   was 

300  The  Catholic  Controvei^sy,  [paetii. 

simply  the  stones  of  the  Eational,  by  which  Almighty 
God  revealed  his  will  to  the  priest,  as  that  learned 
man  Francis  Eibera  holds; — the  reasons  why  the 
High  Priest  had  doctrine  and  truth  in  the  Eational  on 
his  breast  was  without  doubt  because  he  declared  the 
truth  of  judgment,  as  by  the  Urim  and  Thummim  the 
priests  were  instructed  as  to  the  good  pleasure  of 
God,  and  their  understandings  enlightened  and  per- 
fected by  the  Divine  revelation :  thus  the  good  Lyra 
understood  it,  and  Eibera  has  in  my  opinion  sufficiently 
proved.  Hence  when  David  wished  to  know  whether 
he  should  pursue  the  Amalecites  he  said  to  the  priest 
Abiathar :  Bring  me  hither  the  ephod  ( i  Kings 
XXX.  7),  or  vestment  for  the  shoulders,  which  was 
without  doubt  to  discover  the  will  of  God  by  means 
of  the  Eational  which  was  joined  to  it,  as  this  Doctor 
Eibera  continues  learnedly  to  prove.  I  ask  you, — if 
in  the  shadow  there  were  illuminations  of  doctrine 
and  perfections  of  truth  on  the  breast  of  the  priest 
to  feed  and  confirm  the  people  therewith,  what  is 
there  that  our  High  Priest  shall  not  have,  the  priest 
of  us,  I  say,  who  are  in  the  day  and  under  the  risen 
sun  ?  The  High  Priest  of  old  was  but  the  vicar  and 
lieutenant  of  Our  Lord,  as  ours  is,  but  he  would  seem 
to  have  presided  over  the  night  by  his  illuminations, 
and  ours  presides  over  the  day  by  his  instructions ; 
both  of  them  as  ministering  for  another  and  by  the 
light  of  the  Sun  of  Justice,  who  though  he  is  risen  is 
still  veiled  from  our  eyes  by  our  own  mortality  ; — for 
to  see  him  face  to  face  belongs  ordinarily  to  those 
alone  who  are  delivered  from  the  body  which  goes  to 
corruption.  This  has  been  the  faith  of  the  whole 
ancient  Church,  which  in  its  difficulties  has  always 

ART.  VI.  c.  xiii.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  301 

had  recourse  to  the  Eational  of  the  See  of  Eome  to 
see  therein  doctrine  and  truth.  It  is  for  this  reason 
that  S.  Bernard  has  called  the  Pope  "  Aaron  in 
dignity,"  *  and  S.  Jerome  the  Holy  See  "  the  most 
safe  harbour  of  Catholic  communion,"  and  "  heir  of 
the  Apostles,"  for  he  bears  the  Eational  to  enlighten 
with  it  the  whole  of  Christendom,  like  the  Apostles 
and  Aaron,  in  doctrine  and  truth.  It  is  in  this 
sense  that  S.  Jerome  says  to  S.  Damasus :  "  He  who 
gathereth  not  with  thee  scattereth,  that  is,  he  who  is 
not  of  Christ  is  of  Antichrist ; "  and  S.  Bernard  says  t 
that  the  scandals  which  occur,  particularly  in  the  faith, 
must  be  brought  before  the  Eoman  See  : — "  for  I 
think  it  proper  that  there  chiefly  should  the  damage 
of  faith  be  repaired  where  faith  cannot  fail ;  for  to 
what  other  see  was  it  ever  said  :  /  have  prayed  for 
thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not  ?  "  And  S.  Cyprian :  | 
"  They  dare  to  sail  off  to  the  Apostolic  See  and  to  the 
chief  (principalem)  Church,  forgetting  tliat  those  are 
Eomans,  to  whom  wrong  faith  cannot  have  access." 
Do  you  not  see  that  he  speaks  of  the  Eomans  because 
of  the  Chair  of  S.  Peter,  and  says  that  error  cannot 
prevail  there.  The  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Milevis 
with  the  Blessed  S.  Augustine  demand  help  and  in- 
voke the  authority  of  the  Eoman  See  against  the 
Pelagian  heresy,  writing  to  Pope  Innocent  in  these 
terms :  "  We  beseech  you  to  deign  to  apply  the 
pastoral  solicitude  to  the  great  dangers  of  the  infirm 
members  of  Christ ;    since  a   new   heresy   and   most 

*  See  references  previously.  In  margin  here  the  Saint  adds  :  "  S. 
Bernard,  in  his  letter  to  the  Canons  of  Lyons,  submits  all  his  writings 
to  the  Roman  Church."     [Tr.] 

t  Ep.  190.  t  Ep.  55. 

302  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [partil 

destructive  tempest  has  begun  to  arise  amongst  the 
enemies  of  the  grace  of  Christ."  And  if  you  would 
know  why  they  appeal  to  him,  what  do  they  say  ? 
"  The  Lord  has  by  his  highest  favour  placed  thee  in 
the  Apostolic  See."  This  is  what  this  holy  Council 
with  its  great  S.  Augustine  believed,  to  whom  S. 
Innocent  replying  in  a  Letter  which  follows  the  one 
just  quoted  amongst  those  of  S.  Augustine  :  "  Care- 
fully and  rightfully,"  he  says,  "  have  you  consulted  the 
secret  oracles  of  the  Apostolic  honour :  his,  I  say, 
with  whom,  besides  those  things  which  are  outside, 
remains  the  solicitude  of  all  the  churches  as  to  what 
doctrine  is  to  be  held  in  doubtful  things.  For  you 
have  followed  the  fashion  of  the  ancient  rule,  which 
you  and  I  know  to  have  been  always  held  by  the 
whole  world.  But  this  I  pass  over,  for  I  do  not 
believe  that  it  is  unknown  to  your  wisdom ;  how  indeed 
have  you  confirmed  it  by  your  actions,  save  knowing 
that  throughout  all  the  provinces  answers  to  peti- 
tioners ever  emanate  from  the  Apostolic  See  ?  Espe- 
cially when  questions  of  faith  are  discussed,  I 
consider  that  all  our  brethren  and  co-bishops  must 
refer  to  Peter  only,  that  is,  to  the  author  of  their 
name  and  honour;  even  as  your  charity  has  now 
referred  that  which  may  advantage  all  churches  in 
general  throughout  the  whole  world."  Behold  the 
honour  and  credit  in  which  was  the  Apostolic  See 
with  the  most  learned  and  most  holy  of  the  Ancients, 
yea  with  entire  Councils.  They  went  to  it  as  to  the 
true  Ephod  and  Rational  of  the  new  law.  Thus  did 
S.  Jerome  go  to  it  in  the  time  of  Damasus,  to  whom, 
after  having  said  that  the  East  was  cutting  and  tearing 
to  pieces  the  robe  of  Our  Lord,  seamless  and  woven 

ART.  VI.  0.  XIII.]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  303 

from  the  top  throughout,  and  that  the  little  foxes  were 
spoiling  the  vineyard  of  the  Master,  he  says  :  "  As  it  is 
difficult,   amongst  broken  cisterns   that  can  hold  no 
water,  to  discern  where  is  that  fountain  sealed  up,  and 
garden  enclosed,  therefore  I  considered  that  I  must 
consult  the  Chair  of  Peter  and  the  faith  praised  by 
Apostolic  mouth."     I  shall  never  end  if  I  try  to  bring 
forward  the  grand  words  which   the  Ancients   have 
uttered  on  this  point :  he  who  wishes  can  read  them 
quoted  in  the  great  Catechism  of  Peter  Canisius,  in 
which    they   have    been    given    in    full    by    Busseus. 
S.  Cyprian  refers  all  heresies  and  schisms  to  the  con- 
tempt of  this  chief  minister ;  *  so  does  S.  Jerome ;  t 
S.  Ambrose  holds  for  one  same  thing  "  to  communicate 
and  agree  with  the  Catholic  bishops  and  to  agree  with 
the  Eoman  Church : "  |  he  protests  that  he  follows  in 
all  things  and  everywhere   the  form   of   the   Eoman 
Church.     S.  Irenseus  will  have  every  one  be  united  to 
this  Holy  See,  "  on  account  of  its  principal  power." 
The  Eusebians  bring  before  it  the  accusations  against 
S.  Athanasius ;  S.  Athanasius,  who  was  at  Alexandria, 
a  principal  and   patriarchal  see,  went  to  answer  at 
Eome,  being   called   and  cited  to  appear  there :   his 
adversaries  would  not  appear,  "knowing,"  says  Theo- 
doret,  "  that  their  lies  were  manifested  in  open  court." 
The  Eusebians  acknowledge  the  authority  of  the  see 
of  Eome  when  they  call  S.  Athanasius  thither,  and 
S.  Athanasius  when  he  presents  himself.     But  parti- 
cularly do  those  Arian  heretics  the  Eusebians  confess 
the  authority  of  the  see  of  Eome  when  they  dare  not 
appear  there  for  fear  of  being  condemned. 

*  Ad.  Cornel,  contra  Feliciss.  t  Adv.  Lucif. 

X  De  excessu  Fratris,  46. 

304  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

But  who  does  not  know  that  all  the  ancient  heretics 
tried  to  get  themselves  acknowledged  by  the  Pope  ? 
Witness  the  Montanists  or  Cataphrygians,  who  so 
deceived  Pope  Zephyrinus,  if  we  may  believe  Ter- 
tuUian  (not  now  the  man  he  had  been  but  become  a 
heretic  himself),  that  he  issued  letters  of  reunion  in 
their  favour,  which,  however,  he  promptly  revoked  by 
the  advice  of  Praxeas.  In  fine,  he  who  despises  the 
authority  of  the  Pope  will  restore  the  Pelagians, 
Priscillians  and  others,  who  were  only  condemned  by 
provincial  councils  with  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See 
of  Eome.  If  I  wished  to  occupy  myself  in  showing 
you  how  much  Luther  made  of  it  in  the  beginning  of 
his  heresy  I  should  astonish  you  with  the  great  altera- 
tion in  this  your  father.  Look  at  him  in  Cochlseus : 
"Prostrate  at  the  feet  of  Your  Beatitude,  I  offer 
myself  with  all  I  am  and  have  ;  give  me  life,  slay  me, 
call,  recall,  approve,  reject ;  I  shall  acknowledge  the 
voice  of  Christ  presiding  and  speaking,"  These  are 
his  words  in  the  dedicatory  letter  which  he  wrote  to 
Pope  Leo  X.  on  certain  conclusions  of  his,  in  the  year 
1 5 1 8.  But  I  cannot  omit  what  this  great  arch- 
minister  wrote  in  1 5  1 9,  in  certain  other  resolutions  of 
other  propositions ;  for  in  the  thirteenth  he  not  only 
acknowledges  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Eoman  See, 
but  proves  it  by  six  reasons  which  he  holds  to  be 
demonstrations.  I  will  summarise  them :  ist  reason — 
the  Pope  could  not  have  reached  this  height  and  this 
monarchy  except  by  the  will  of  God ;  but  the  will 
of  God  is  always  to  be  venerated,  therefore  the  primacy 
of  the  Pope  is  not  to  be  called  in  question.  2d.  We 
must  give  in  to  an  adversary  rather  than  break  the 
union  of  charity ;  therefore  it  is  better  to  obey  the 

ART.  VI.  c.  XIV.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  305 

Pope  than  to  separate  from  the  Church.  3d.  We 
must  not  resist  God  who  wills  to  lay  on  us  the  burden 
of  obeying  many  rulers,  according  to  the  word  of 
Solomon  in  his  Proverbs  (xxviii.  2).  4th.  There  is 
no  power  which  is  not  from  God,  therefore  that  of 
the  Pope  which  is  so  fully  established  is  from  God. 
5  th.  Practically  the  same.  6th.  All  the  faithful  so 
believe,  and  it  is  impossible  that  Our  Lord  should  not 
be  with  them ;  now  we  must  stay  with  Our  Lord  and 
Christiane  in  all  things  and  everywhere :  He  says 
afterwards  that  these  reasons  were  unanswerable,  and 
that  all  the  Scripture  comes  to  support  them.  What 
do  you  think  of  Luther, — is  he  not  a  Catholic  ?  And 
yet  this  was  at  the  beginning  of  his  reformation. 

Calvin  gives  the  same  testimony,  though  he  goes 
on  to  embroil  the  question  as  much  as  he  can ;  for 
speaking  of  the  See  of  Eome  he  confesses  that  the 
Ancients  have  honoured  and  revered  it,  that  it  has 
been  the  refuge  of  bishops,  and  more  firm  in  the  faith 
than  the  other  sees,  which  last  fact  he  attributes  to  a 
want  of  quickness  of  understanding. 



Under  the  ancient  law  the  High  Priest  did  not  wear 
the  Rational  except  when  he  was  vested  in  the  ponti- 
fical robes  and  was  entering  before  the  Lord.  Thus 
we  do  not  say  that  the  Pope  cannot  err  in  his  private 
opinions,  as  did  John  XXII. ;  or  be  altogether  a  heretic 
III.  u 

3o6  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [partii. 

as  perhaps  Honorius  was.  Now  when  he  is  explicitly 
a  heretic,  he  falls  i'pso  facto  from  his  dignity  and  out 
of  the  Church,  and  the  Church  must  either  deprive 
him,  or,  as  some  say,  declare  him  deprived,  of  his 
Apostolic  See,  and  must  say  as  S.  Peter  did :  Let 
another  take  his  hishopric*  When  he  errs  in  his 
private  opinion  he  must  be  instructed,  advised,  con- 
vinced ;  as  happened  with  John  XXIL,  who  was  so  far 
from  dying  obstinate  or  from  determining  anything 
during  his  life  concerning  his  opinion,  that  he  died 
whilst  he  was  making  the  examination  which  is 
necessary  for  determining  in  a  matter  of  faith,  as  his 
successor  declared  in  the  JExtravag antes  which  begins 
Benedictus  Deus.  But  when  he  is  clothed  with  the 
pontifical  garments,  I  mean  when  he  teaches  the  whole 
Church  as  shepherd,  in  general  matters  of  faith  and 
morals,  then  there  is  nothing  but  doctrine  and  truth. 
And  in  fact  everything  a  king  says  is  not  a  law  or  an 
edict,  but  that  only  which  a  king  says  as  king  and 
as  a  legislator.  So  everything  the  Pope  says  is  not 
canon  law  or  of  legal  obligation ;  he  must  mean  to 
define  and  to  lay  down  the  law  for  the  sheep,  and  he 
must  keep  the  due  order  and  form.  Thus  we  say 
that  we  must  appeal  to  him  not  as  to  a  learned  man, 
for  in  this  he  is  ordinarily  surpassed  by  some  others, 
but  as  to  the  general  head  and  pastor  of  the  Church : 
and  as  such  we  must  honour,  follow,  and  firmly 
embrace  his  doctrine,  for  then  he  carries  on  his  breast 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  doctrine  and  truth.  And 
again  we  must  not  think  that  in  everything  and  every- 
where his  judgment  is  infallible,  but  then  only  when 
he  gives  judgment  on  a  matter  of  faith  in  questions 

*  Acts  i. 

ART.  VI.  c.  XIV.]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  307 

necessary  to  the  whole  Church  ;  for  in  particular  cases 
which  depend  on  human  fact  he  can  err,  there  is  no 
doubt,  though  it  is  not  for  us  to  control  him  in  these 
cases  save  with  all  reverence,  submission,  and  dis- 
cretion. Theologians  have  said,  in  a  word,  that  he 
can  err  in  questions  of  fact,  not  in  questions  of  right ; 
that  he  can  err  extra  cathedram,  outside  the  chair  of 
Peter,  that  is,  as  a  private  individual,  by  writings  and 
bad  example. 

But  he  cannot  err  when  he  is  in  cathedra^  that  is, 
when  he  intends  to  make  an  instruction  and  decree 
for  the  guidance  of  the  whole  Church,  when  he 
means  to  confirm  his  brethren  as  supreme  pastor,  and 
to  conduct  them  into  the  pastures  of  the  faith.  For 
then  it  is  not  so  much  man  who  determines,  resolves, 
and  defines  as  it  is  the  Blessed  Holy  Spirit  by  man, 
which  Spirit,  according  to  the  promise  made  by  Our 
Lord  to  the  Apostles,  teaches  all  truth  to  the  Church, 
and,  as  the  Greek  says  and  the  Church  seems  to 
understand  in  a  collect  of  Pentecost,"^  conducts  and 
directs  his  Church  into  all  truth :  But  token  that 
Spirit  of  truth  shall  come,  he  will  teach  you  all  truth, 
or,  will  lead  you  into  all  truth.'f  And  how  does  the 
Holy  Spirit  lead  the  Church  except  by  the  ministry 
and  office  of  preachers  and  pastors  ?  But  if  the 
pastors  have  pastors  they  must  also  follow  them,  as 
all  must  follow  him  who  is  the  supreme  pastor,  by 
whose  ministry  Our  God  wills  to  lead  not  only  the 
lambs  and  little  sheep,  but  the  sheep  and  mothers  of 
lambs ;  that  is,  not  the  people  only  but  also  the  other 
pastors  :  he  succeeds  S.  Peter,  who  received  this  charge  : 
Feed  my  sheep.  Thus  it  is  that  God  leads  his  Church 
*  Wednesday  in  Whit-week.  f  John  xvi.  13. 

3o8  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  h. 

into  the  pastures  of  his  Holy  Word,  and  in  the  exposi- 
tion of  this  he  who  seeks  the  truth  under  other  lead- 
ing loses  it.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  the  leader  of  the 
Church,  he  leads  it  by  its  pastor ;  he  therefore  who 
follows  not  the  pastor  follows  not  the  Holy  Spirit. 

But  the  great  Cardinal  of  Toledo  remarks  most 
appositely  on  this  place  that  it  is  not  said  he  shall 
carry  the  Church  into  all  truth,  but  he  shall  lead ;  to 
show  that  though  the  Holy  Spirit  enlightens  the 
Church,  he  wills  at  the  same  time  that  she  should  use 
the  diligence  which  is  required  for  keeping  the  true 
way,  as  the  Apostles  did,  who,  having  to  give  an 
answer  to  an  important  question,  debated,  comparing 
the  Holy  Scriptures  together;  and  when  they  had 
diligently  done  this  they  concluded  by  the — It  hath 
seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Spirit  and  to  us ;  that  is,  the 
Holy  Spirit  has  enlightened  us  and  we  have  walked, 
he  has  guided  us  and  we  have  followed  him,  up  to 
this  truth.  The  ordinary  means  must  be  employed  to 
discover  the  truth,  and  yet  in  this  must  be  acknow- 
ledged the  drawing  and  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Thus  is  the  Christian  flock  led, — by  the  Holy  Spirit  but 
under  the  charge  and  guidance  of  its  Pastor,  who 
however  does  not  walk  at  hazard,  but  according  to 
necessity  convokes  the  other  pastors,  either  partially 
or  universally,  carefully  regards  the  track  of  his  pre- 
decessors, considers  the  ITrim  and  Thummim  of  the 
Word  of  God,  enters  before  his  God  by  his  prayers 
and  invocations,  and,  having  thus  diligently  sought 
out  the  true  way,  boldly  puts  himself  on  his  voyage 
and  courageously  sets  sail.  Happy  the  man  who 
follows  him  and  puts  himself  under  the  discipline 
of  his  crook !     Happy  the  man  who  embarks  in  his 

ART.  VI.  0.  XIV.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  309 

boat,  for  he  shall  feed  on  truth,  and  shall  arrive  at 
the  port  of  holy  doctrine  ! 

Thus  he  never  gives  a  general  command  to  the 
whole  Church  in  necessary  things  except  with  the 
assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  as  he  is  not  want- 
ing in  necessary  things  even  to  the  animals,  because 
lie  has  established  them,  will  not  be  more  wanting  to 
Christianity  in  what  is  necessary  for  its  life  and  per- 
fection. And  how  would  the  Church  be  one  and 
holy,  as  the  Scriptures  and  Creeds  describe  her  ? 
— for  if  she  followed  a  pastor,  and  the  pastor  erred, 
how  would  she  be  holy  ;  if  she  followed  him  not,  how 
would  she  be  one  ?  And  what  confusion  would  be 
seen  in  Christendom,  while  the  one  party  should  con- 
sider a  law  good  the  others  bad,  and  while  the  sheep, 
instead  of  feeding  and  fattening  in  the  pasture  of 
Scripture  and  the  Holy  Word,  should  occupy  them- 
selves in  controlling  the  decision  of  their  superior  ? 

It  remains  therefore  that  according  to  Divine  Pro- 
vidence we  consider  as  closed  that  which  S.  Peter 
shall  close  with  his  keys,  and  as  open  that  which  he 
shall  open,  when  seated  in  his  chair  of  doctrine  teach- 
ing the  whole  Church. 

If  indeed  the  ministers  had  censured  vices,  proved 
the  inutility  of  certain  decrees  and  censures,  borrowed 
some  holy  counsels  from  the  ethical  books  of  S. 
Gregory,  and  from  S.  Bernard's  Be  GonMeratione, 
brought  forward  some  good  plan  for  removing  the 
abuses  which  have  crept  into  the  administration  of 
benefices  through  the  malice  of  the  age  and  of  men, 
and  had  addressed  themselves  to  His  Holiness  with 
humility  and  gratitude,  all  good  men  would  have 
honoured  them  and  favoured  their  designs.     The  good 

310  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [partu. 

Cardinals  Contarini  the  Theatine,  Sadolet,  and  Pole, 
with  those  other  great  men  who  counselled  the  refor- 
mation of  abuses  in  this  way,  have  thereby  deserved 
immortal  commendation  from  posterity.  But  to  fill 
heaven  and  earth  with  invectives,  railings,  outrages, — 
to  calumniate  the  Pope,  and  not  only  in  his  person, 
which  is  bad  enough,  but  in  his  office,  to  attack  the 
See  which  all  antiquity  has  honoured,  to  wish  to  go  so 
far  as  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  him,  contrary  to  the 
sense  of  the  whole  Church,  to  style  his  position  itself 
anti-Christianism — who  shall  call  this  right  ?  If  the 
great  Council  of  Chalcedon  was  so  indignant  when 
the  Patriarch  Dioscorus  excommunicated  Pope  Leo, 
who  can  endure  the  insolence  of  Luther,  who  issued  a 
Bull  in  which  he  excommunicates  the  Pope  and  the 
bishops  and  the  whole  Church  ?  All  the  Church 
gives  him  (the  Pope)  patents  of  honour,  speaks  to  him 
with  reverence.  What  shall  we  say  of  that  fine  pre- 
face in  which  Luther  addressed  the  Holy  See :  "  Martin 
Luther  to  the  most  Holy  Apostolic  See  and  its  whole 
Parliament,  grace  and  health.  In  the  first  place,  most 
holy  see,  crack  but  burst  not  on  account  of  this  new 
salutation  in  which  I  place  my  name  first  and  in  the 
principal  place."  And  after  having  quoted  the  Bull 
against  which  he  was  writing,  he  begins  with  these 
wicked  and  vile  words :  "  Ego  autem  dico  ad  papam  et 
hullce  hujus  minas,  istud :  qui  prce  minis  moritur  ad 
ejus  sepulturam  compulsari  debet  crepitihus  ventris." 
And  when  writing  against  the  King  of  England, — 
"  Living,"  said  he,  "  I  will  be  the  enemy  of  the  papacy, 
burnt  I  will  be  thy  enemy."  What  say  you  of  this 
great  Father  of  the  Church?  Are  not  these  words 
worthy  of  such  a  reformer  ?     I  am  ashamed  to  read 

ART.  VI.  c  XIV.]        The  Rtile  of  Faith,  311 

them,  and  my  hand  is  vexed  when  it  lays  out  such 
shameful  things,  but  if  they  are  hidden  from  you,  you 
will  never  believe  that  he  is  such  as  he  is, — and  when 
he  says :  "  It  is  ours  not  to  be  judged  by  him  but  to 
judge  him." 

But  I  detain  you  too  long  on  a  subject  which  does 
not  require  great  examination.  You  read  the  writings 
of  Calvin,  of  Zwingle,  of  Luther :  take  out  of  these,  I 
beg  you,  the  railings,  calumnies,  insults,  detraction, 
ridicule,  and  buffoonery  which  they  contain  against 
the  Pope  and  the  Holy  See  of  Kome,  and  you  will  find 
that  nothing  will  remain.  You  listen  to  your  ministers  ; 
impose  silence  upon  them  as  regards  railings,  detrac- 
tion, calumnies  against  the  Holy  See,  and  you  will 
have  your  sermons  half  their  length.  They  utter  a 
thousand  calumnies  on  this  point:  this  is  the  general 
rendezvous  of  all  your  ministers.  On  whatever  sub- 
jects they  may  be  composing  their  books,  as  if  they  were 
tired  and  spent  with  their  labour  they  stay  to  dwell 
on  the  vices  of  the  Popes,  very  often  saying  what  they 
know  well  not  to  be  the  fact.  Beza  says  that  for  a 
long  time  there  has  been  no  Pope  who  has  cared 
about  religion  or  who  has  been  a  theologian.  Is  he 
not  seeking  to  deceive  somebody  ? — for  he  knows  well 
that  Adrian,  Marcellus,  and  these  five  last  have  been 
very  great  theologians.  What  does  he  mean  by  these 
lies  ?  But  let  us  say  that  there  may  be  vice  and 
ignorance :  "  What  has  the  Eoman  Chair  done  to 
thee,"  says  S.  Augustine,*  "  in  which  Peter  sat  and  in 
which  now  Anastasius  sits  ?  .  .  .  Why  do  you  call 
the  Apostlic  Chair  the  chair  of  pestilence  ?  If  it  is 
on  account  of  men  whom  you  consider  to  be  declaring 

*  Contra  lit.  Petil.  ii.  51. 

312  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [parth. 

and  not  keeping  the  law — did  Our  Lord,  on  account  of 
the  Pharisees,  of  whom  he  said :  they  say  and  do  not 
do  any  injury  to  the  chair  in  which  they  sat  ?  Did 
he  not  commend  that  chair  of  Moses,  and  reprove 
them,  saving  the  honour  of  their  chair  ?  For  he  says : 
Super  catJiedram,  &c,  (Matt,  xxiii.  2).  If  you  con- 
sidered these  things  you  would  not,  on  account  of 
the  men  you  speak  against,  blaspheme  the  Apostolic 
Chair,  with  which  you  do  not  communicate.  But 
what  does  it  all  mean  save  that  they  have  nothing  to 
say,  and  yet  are  unable  to  keep  from  ill-saying." 





In  order  that  Moses  might  be  believed  God  gave  him 
power  to  work  miracles  (Ex.  iv.) ;  Our  Lord,  says  S. 
Mark  (ult.),  confirmed  in  the  same  manner  the  Apostolic 
preaching ;  if  Our  Lord  had  not  done  such  miracles 
men  would  not  have  sinned  in  not  believing  in  him, 

*  The  Saint  has  the  following  detached  note  :  "  I  keep  a  place  for 
proving  the  faith  by  miracles,  after  the  'Rules  of  faith.'  This  will 
be  a  sort  of  6th  (7th)  Rule,  not  ordinary  but  extraordinary,  which 
our  adversaries  have  not,  though  they  would  need  to  have  it,  as  they 
despise  the  others  which  they  lack.  I  will  there  bring  in  the  saying 
of  the  Sr.  des  Montaignes."     [Tr.] 

ART.  vn.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith.  3 1 3 

says  the  same  Lord  (John  xv.  24) ;  S.  Paul  testifies 
that  God  confirmed  the  faith  by  miracles  (Heb.  ii.  4). 
Therefore  a  miracle  is  a  sound  proof  of  the  faith,  and 
an  important  argument  for  persuading  men  to  believe ; 
for  if  it  were  not  our  God  would  not  have  made  use 
of  it. 

And  it  is  needless  to  answer  that  miracles  are  no 
longer  necessary  after  the  sowing  of  the  faith,  for  I 
have  not  only  shown  the  contrary  above,  but  I  am 
now  not  maintaining  that  they  are  necessary,  but 
simply  that  when  it  may  please  God  to  work  them 
for  the  confirmation  of  some  article  we  are  obliged  to 
believe  it.  For  either  the  miracle  is  rightly  per- 
suasive and  confirmatory  of  belief  or  not :  if  not,  then 
Our  Lord  did  not  rightly  confirm  his  doctrine  ;  if  it 
be,  then  when  miracles  do  take  place  they  oblige  us 
to  accept  them  as  a  most  convincing  reason, — which 
of  course  they  are. 

Thoib  art  the  God  who  doest  wonders,  says  David 
(Ps.  Ixxvi.  15)  to  Almighty  God,  therefore  that  which 
is  confirmed  by  miracles  is  confirmed  on  the  part  of  God ; 
now  God  cannot  be  author  or  confirmer  of  a  lie,  that 
therefore  which  is  confirmed  by  miracles  cannot  be 
a  lie,  but  must  be  absolute  truth. 

And,  in  order  to  obviate  idle  objections,  I  allow 
that  there  are  false  miracles  and  true  miracles,  and 
that  among  true  miracles  there  are  some  which  evi- 
dently argue  the  presence  of  God's  power,  and  others 
which  do  so  only  by  their  circumstances.  The 
miracles  which  Antichrist  will  do  will  all  be  false, 
both  because  his  intention  will  be  to  deceive,  and 
because  one  part  will  only  be  illusions  and  vain 
magical  appearances,  the  other  part  not  miracles  in 

314  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

nature  but  only  miracles  to  men, — that  is,  on  account 
of  being  extraordinary  they  will  seem  miracles  to 
simple  folk.  Such  will  be  his  making  fire  come  down 
from  heaven  in  the  sight  of  men  (Apoc.  xiii.),  his 
making  the  image  of  the  beast  speak,  and  healing  a 
mortal  wound.  Of  these,  the  descent  of  the  fire  upon 
the  earth  and  the  speaking  of  the  image  will,  as  it 
seems,  be  mere  illusions,  whence  he  adds  in  the  sight 
of  men;  they  will  be  acts  of  magic.  The  healing  of 
the  mortal  wound  will  be  a  popular  not  a  philosopher's 
miracle ; — for  when  the  people  see  what  they  think 
impossible  they  take  it  to  be  a  miracle,  as  they 
consider  many  things  impossible  in  nature  which  are 
not  so.  Now  many  cures  are  of  this  kind,  and  man;y 
wounds  are  mortal  and  incurable  to  some  doctors 
which  are  not  so  to  those  who  are  more  competent 
and  have  some  choicer  remedy.  Thus  that  wound 
will  be  mortal  according  to  the  ordinary  course  of 
medicine ;  but  the  devil,  who  is  more  advanced  in 
the  knowledge  of  the  virtues  of  herbs,  perfumes, 
minerals,  and  other  drugs  than  men  are,  will  effect 
this  cure  by  the  secret  application  of  medicaments 
unknown  to  men ;  and  this  will  appear  a  miracle  to 
any  one  who  is  unable  to  distinguish  between  human 
and  diabolic  knowledge,*  between  diabolic  and  divine ; 
whereas  while  the  diabolic  exceeds  the  human  by  a 
great  degree,  the  divine  surpasses  the  diabolic  by  an 
infinity.  Human  science  extends  to  but  a  little  part 
of  the  virtue  which  is  in  nature,  diabolic  goes  much 
further,  but  divine  has  no  other  limits,  in  dealing 
with  nature,  but  its  own  infinity. 

*  The  following  note  is  placed  in  the  margin  of  the  autograph  : 
Ilfaut  abieger  tout  ceci  d  peu  de  paroles  et  scholastiques.     [Tr.] 

ART.  VII.  0. 1.]  The  Rule  of  Faith,  315 

I  said  that  amoDg  true  miracles  there  are  some 
which  furnish  a  certain  knowledge  and  proof  that  the 
power  of  God  is  at  work  therein,  others  not  so  except 
by  consideration  and  aid  of  the  circumstances.  This 
appears  from  what  I  have  said ;  and,  for  example,  the 
wonders  which  the  Egyptian  magicians  did  (Ex.  iv.— 
viii.)  were  exactly  like  those  of  Moses  as  regards  the 
external  appearance,  but  he  who  considers  the  circum- 
stances will  very  easily  see  that  the  one  kind  were 
true  miracles,  the  others  false ;  as  the  magicians 
themselves  confessed,  when  they  said :  The  finger  of 
God  is  here.  So  might  I  say  if  Our  Lord  had  never 
done  other  miracles  than  to  tell  the  Samaritan  woman 
that  he  whom  she  then  had  was  not  her  husband 
(John  iv.  1 8),  or  than  to  change  the  water  into  wine 
(lb.  ii.),  it  might  have  been  possible  to  think  that 
there  was  illusion  and  magic  ;  but  since  these  wonders 
proceeded  from  the  same  might  which  made  the 
blind  see,  the  dumb  speak,  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead 
live,  there  remained  no  room  for  doubt.  Eor,  to 
make  things  pass  from  privation  and  non-existence 
to  actuality,*  and  to  give  to  man  the  vital  operations, 
are  things  impossible  to  all  human  powers ;  these  are 
strokes  of  the  sovereign  Master ;  and  when  afterwards 
he  pleases  to  effect  cures  or  alterations  in  things  by  his 
almighty  power,  he  still  makes  them  to  be  recognised 
as  miraculous  even  though  secret  nature  may  be  able 
to  do  as  much, — because,  having  done  what  surpasses 
nature,  he  has  given  us  assurance  of  what  he  is  and 
of  the  character  of  the  [thing  donej.t  As  when  a 
man  has  made  a  masterpiece,  though  he  may  after- 

*  La  privation  en  son  habitude. 
t  The  line  here  ends  with  de  la.    [Tr.  ] 

3i6  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [PARxn. 

wards  do  some  common  works  we  still  consider  him  a 

In  a  word,  the  miracle,  the  true  miracle,  is  a  very- 
certain  proof,  and  a  certain  confirmation  of  belief, 
and  this  at  whatever  time  it  may  be  worked,  other- 
wise we  must  overthrow  all  the  Apostolic  preaching. 
It  was  reasonable  that  faith  being  of  things  which 
surpass  nature,  it  should  be  certified  by  works  which 
surpass  nature,  and  which  show  that  the  preaching  or 
announced  word  proceeds  from  the  mouth  and  autho- 
rity of  the  Master  of  nature,  whose  power  is  un- 
limited, and  who,  by  a  miracle,  makes  himself  witness 
of  the  truth,  subscribes  and  stamps  the  word  delivered 
by  the  preacher. 

Now  it  seems  that  miracles  are  general  attestations 
for  the  simple  and  commoner  sort ;  for  not  every  one 
can  go  so  deep  as  to  the  admirable  harmony  there  is 
between  the  Prophets  and  the  Gospel,  to  the  great 
wisdom  of  the  Scriptures,  or  to  similar  striking  marks, 
which  distinguish  the  Christian  religion.  This  is  an 
examination  for  the  learned  to  make ;  but  there  is  no 
one  who  does  not  comprehend  the  argument  furnished 
by  a  true  miracle ;  everybody  understands  that  lan- 
guage. Amongst  Christians  it  seems  as  if  miracles 
are  not  necessary,  but  in  reality  they  are ;  and  it  is 
not  without  reason  that  the  sweetness  of  Divine  Provi- 
dence supplies  them  to  his  Church  at  all  seasons,  for 
in  all  there  are  heresies.  These  indeed  are  sufficiently 
condemned,  even  according  to  the  capacity  of  the  less 
gifted,  by  the  antiquity,  majesty,  unity,  Catholicity, 
sanctity  of  the  Church,  but  everybody  cannot  value 
his  inheritance  (as  Optatus  says)  according  to  its  true 
value.     Everybody  does  not  understand  this  language 

ART.  VII.  c.  II.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  317 

in  its  full  force,  but  when  God  speaks  by  works  every- 
body understands — this  is  a  language  common  to  all 
nations.  So  the  writing  on  letters  of  protection  may 
not  be  recognised  by  everybody,  but  when  the  white 
cross,  the  arms  of  the  Prince,  are  seen,  all  the  world 
knows  that  sovereign  approval  and  authority  run  there. 



There  is  scarcely  any  article  of  our  religion  which  has 
not  been  approved  of  God  by  miracles.  The  miracles 
which  take  place  in  the  Church,  showing  where  the 
true  Church  is,  sufficiently  prove  all  the  belief  of  the 
Church :  for  God  would  never  bear  witness  to  a 
Church  which  had  not  the  true  faith  and  was  erring, 
idolatrous,  and  deceiving. 

But  this  supreme  goodness  does'  not  stop  there ;  it 
has  confirmed  almost  all  the  points  of  the  Catholic  faith 
by  illustrious  miracles,  and  we  find  that,  by  a  special 
providence  of  God,  he  has  born  witness,  in  a  most 
remarkable  manner  and  by  incontestable  miracles,  to 
the  truth  of  what  we  teach  on  practically  all  the 
points  of  difference  between  us  and  the  ministers. 

"  When  Agapitus,  the  Bishop  of  the  holy  Eoman 
Church,"   says    S.   Gregory   the   Great,*    "  was   going 

*  Dialog.,  1.  iii.  c.  iii. 

3i8  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parth. 

through  Greece  to  visit  the  Emperor  Justinian,  the 
relatives  of  a  certain  dumb  and  lame  man  presented 
him  to  Agapitus  to  be  healed,  affirming  that  they  had 
a  firm  confidence  that  he  would  be  cured,  in  the  power 
of   God,   by   the   authority   of    Peter."       Behold   the 
belief  of  these  good  folk  ;  they  held  that  the  Pope 
had  succeeded   in   the   authority  of  Peter   and  that 
therefore  he  also  possessed  authority  in  an  eminent 
degree.      One  of   your   ministers   would   have   called 
them  superstitious ;  the  Catholic  Church  would  have 
maintained,  as   it   does   now,    that   their   belief   was 
justified.     Let  us  see  what  testimony  Our  Lord  bore 
to  it.    "  Upon  this,"  continues  St.  Gregory,  "  the  vener- 
able man  betook  himself  to  prayer,  and  celebrating 
holy  Mass  offered  Sacrifice  in  the  sight  of  the  most 
High.     When  he  had  ended  and  was  leaving  the  altar, 
he  took  the  hand  of  the  lame  man,  and  before  the  eyes 
of  the  attendant  people  he  raised  him  from  the  ground, 
and  gave  him  to  stand  by  his  own  feet,  and  placing  the 
Lord's  body  in  his   mouth,  that   long   silent  tongue 
was  loosed  and  spoke.     All  the  people,  struck  with 
admiration,  began  to  shed  tears  of  joy,  and  a  great 
fear  and  reverence  came  upon  them  when  they  saw 
what  Agapitus  was  enabled  to  do,  in  the  power  of  the 
Lord,  by  Peter's  assistance."     Such  are  the  words  of 
S.  Gregory. 

What  do  you  say  to  this  ?  If  you  asked  me  who 
worked  this  miracle,  I  reply  by  the  very  words  of 
Our  Lord.*  The,  Mind  see,  the  lame  walk,  the  lepers 
are  cleansed,  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead  rise  again,  to  the 
poor  the  Gospel  is  preached.  In  what  faith  was  it 
granted  ?     In  the  faith  that  the  Pope  is  the  successor 

*  Matt.  xi.  5. 

ART.  VII.  0.  II.  J        The  Rule  of  Faith.  319 

of  Peter  and  has  his  sublime  authority.  By  what 
acts  was  it  gained  ?  By  the  most  holy  sacrifice  of 
the  Mass  and  the  real  application  of  the  Lord's  body 
to  the  mouth  of  the  infirm  man.  In  what  did  the 
miracle  consist  ?  In  the  communication  of  a  faculty 
of  which  the  recipient  had  hitherto  been  short,  in 
the  bestowal  of  a  vital  operation,  that  is,  of  the 
hearing,  for  although  it  is  not  said  that  he  was  deaf, 
he  was  so  in  reality,  because  he  who  is  born  dumb 
is  always  deaf.  What  other  conclusion,  then,  can  we 
draw  except  that  the,  finger  of  God  is  here*  that  God 
has  signed  and  sealed  this  our  belief  as  to  the  suc- 
cession of  the  Pope  in  the  authority  of  Peter,  and  as  to 
the  article  of  most  holy  Mass  ?  At  what  period  did 
this  miracle  take  place  ?  In  the  period  of  the  most  pure 
and  holy  Church ;  for  both  Calvin  and  the  Lutherans 
admit  that  the  Church  remained  pure  till  after  S. 
Gregory.  Who  relates  the  event  ?  A  saintly  and 
learned  author,  as  our  adversaries  themselves  confess, 
for  they  make  him  the  last  good  Pope.  Where  did 
the  miracle  occur  ?  Before  the  eyes  of  a  whole 
people,  who  were  Greeks  and  not  zealous  upholders  of 
the  Holy  See. 

Again,  we  preach  the  reality  of  the  Body  and  Blood 
of  Our  Lord  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  altar.  He  him- 
self has  authorised  this  belief  by  the  miraculous  sight 
of  it  which  he  gave  to  a  Jew  and  a  Jewess  who  were 
assisting  at  the  Mass  of  S.  Basil;  as  testifies  S. 
Amphilochius,t  who  flourished  about  the  year  380, 
to  take  another  instance,  a  woman  who  had  made 
the  bread  which  was  to  be  consecrated,  when  she  saw 

*  Exod.  viii.  19. 
t  VitaS.Basilii.  This  life  is  no  longer  regarded  as  authentic.  [Tr.] 


20  T'Ae  Catholic  Controversy.  [partii. 

S.  Gregory  the  Great  coming  towards  her,  holding 
that  which  was  no  longer  bread  but  the  most  holy 
Sacrament,  and  saying :  Corpus  Domini  Nostri  Jesu 
Christi  custodial  animam,  &c.,  began  to  smile.  S. 
Gregory  asking  her  why  she  smiled,  she  replied  that 
she  herself  had  made  the  bread  which  he  was  calling 
the  Lord's  body.  S.  Gregory  obtained  by  prayer  that 
the  Holy  Eucharist  should  appear  outwardly  what 
it  really  was  inwardly,  whereby  this  poor  woman  was 
brought  back  to  faith  and  the  faith  of  all  was  con- 
firmed.    The  history  is  given  by  Paulus  Diaconus.* 

We  teach  that  Our  Lord,  really  present  in  the 
Holy  Sacrament,  is  to  be  adored  there.  Gorgonia, 
sister  of  S.  Gregory  Nozianzen,  made  such  adoration 
and  instantaneously  grew  well  of  a  malady  in  itself 
incurable.  Thus  bears  witness  her  brother  himself.t 
S.  Chrysostom  relates  J  two  admirable  apparitions 
of  bands  of  angels  seen  round  the  altar  during  the 
Holy  Sacrifice,  "  their  heads  bowed  as  one  sees  the 
heads  of  soldiers  bent  before  their  king.  And,"  adds 
that  mouth  of  gold,  "  I  readily  believe  it." 

We  teach  Transubstantiation ;  and  the  narratives 
cited  from  S.  Amphilochius  and  from  Paulus  Diaconus 
attest  that  mystery. 

We  preach  that  the  Holy  Eucharist  is  not  only  a 
Sacrament  but  also  a  Sacrifice ;  and  S.  Augustine, 
speaking  of  .a  place  belonging  to  Hesperius,  in  the 
district  of  Fussale,  which  had  been  made  uninhabitable 
by  the  violence  of  evil  spirits,  says :  §  "  One  of  the 
priests  went  to  the  spot,  offered  the  Sacrifice  of  the 
Body  of  Christ,  beseeching  that  if  possible  this  vexa- 

*   Vita  S.  Oregorii,  sec.  xxiii.         t  In  Gorgon. ,  sec.  xviii. 

X  Be  Sacerdot.y  1.  vi.  sec.  4.  §  De  Civit.  Dei,  1.  xxii.  c.  viii. 

ART.  VII.  0.  II.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  321 

tion  might  cease.  By  God's  mercy  it  did  so  at  once." 
What  I  have  related  of  Agapitus  comes  in  here. 

We  preach  the  holy  Communion  of  Saints  in  the 
prayer  which  they  make  for  us  and  in  the  honour  which 
we  pay  them ;  but  when  should  I  stop  if  I  wanted  to 
give  you  a  list  of  all  the  miracles  which  have  occurred 
in  support  of  this  belief  ?  Theodoret,  in  his  work 
Be  cur  and.  Grcec.  affect,  j  discourses  at  length  upon 
them.  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  narrates  an  incontes- 
table miracle  in  the  conversion  of  S.  Cyprian  by 
Our  Lady.* 

We  honour  their  relics ;  take  note  how  S.  Augus- 
tine gives  a  lengthy  history  of  certain  miracles  effected 
by  the  relics  of  S.  Stephen,t  and  in  the  same  place 
he  describes  one  which  was  worked  by  the  relics  of 
S.  Gervase  at  Milan,  viz.,  the  cure  of  a  blind  man. 
He  gives  it  again  in  his  '*  Confessions/'  J  and  we  have 
it  also  in  S.  Ambrose.  § 

We  use  the  sign  of  the  cross  against  the  devil; 
and  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  informs  us  ||  that  Julian 
the  apostate,  on  an  occasion  of  an  idolatrous  sacrifice, 
when  the  devil  appeared  to  him,  made  this  sign.  The 
devil  took  to  flight.  The  sorcerer  or  magician  told 
the  apostate  that  he  fled  not  out  of  fear  but  out  of 
disgust ;  "  He  had  us  in  abomination,  not  in  dread, 
said  the  sorcerer ;  what  is  worst  triumphs."  Eusebius 
testifies  to  the  wonders  worked  by  this  holy  sign  in 
the  time  of  Constantino  the  Great.H 

In  our  churches  we  have  sacred  vessels ;  and  S. 
Chrysostom  recounts   that  Julian,  the  uncle  of    the 

*  In  laudem  Cypr.,  sec.  xi.  t  Be  Civit.  Dei,  1.  xxii.  c.  viii. 

X  Lib.  ix.  c.  vii,  §  Serrno  vel  Epist.  de  invent.  SS.  Gerv.  et  Prot. 

II  Orat  I.  contra  Jul.,  sectiS.  Iv.  Ivi.       H   Vita  Const.,  1.  ii.  cc.  vi.-xv. 
III.  X 

322  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parth. 

Emperor  Julian,  together  with  a  certain  treasurer, 
stole  and  profaned  them.*  Julian,  however,  died 
shortly  after,  eaten  up  by  worms ;  the  treasurer  burst 
in  two  on  the  spot. 

We  venerate  the  sacred  chrism  with  which  the 
baptized  are  anointed  in  holy  Confirmation ;  and  S. 
Optatus  of  Milevis  tells  that  when  the  phial  or 
ampulla  of  the  holy  chrism  was  cast  by  the  Donatists 
upon  the  rocks,  "  an  angelic  hand  was  there  to  direct 
it  with  an  invisible  upholding ;  it  was  thrown  down, 
but  it  did  not  suffer  from  the  fall."  t 

We  humbly  confess  our  sins  to  our  ecclesiastical 
superiors ;  and  S.  John  Climacus  relates  that  while 
a  certain  great  sinner  was  confessing  his  crimes,  there 
was  seen  one  of  grand  and  terrible  aspect,  who  ruled 
out  the  sins  from  a  register  as  fast  as  they  were  con- 
fessed ;  for,  says  the  same  Climacus,  confession  surely 
delivers  from  the  eternal  confusion.  J 

We  have  images  in  our  churches ;  but  who  knows 
not  the  history  of  the  crucifying  of  an  image  of  Our 
Lord  by  the  Jews  of  Berytus  in  Syria  ?  Not  only 
did  blood  flow  forth,  but  this  blood  healed  of  all 
maladies  those  whom  it  touched.  The  great  S. 
Athanasius  gives  the  history.  § 

We  have  the  custom  of  using  holy  water  and  blessing 
bread ;  but  S.  Jerome  relates  that  many  employed 
for  healing  the  sick  bread  blessed  by  S.  Hilarion ;  || 
and  S.  Gregory  the  Great  says  that  S.  Fortunatus 
healed   a   man  who   had   broken   his    leg   by   a   fall 

*  I)e  S.  Bahyla,  sec.  xvii. 
t  Contra  Donat.,  1.  ii.  sec.  xix.  :|:  Scala,  grad.  iv. 

§  De  passione  imag.  Dom.  Nostri.     This  ancient  work  is  no  longer 
attributed  to  S  Athanasius.     [Tr.]  ||   Vita  S.  Hil.,  sec.  xxx. 

ART.  VII.  0.  II.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  323 

from    his    horse   with   a   simple    sprinkling    of    holy 
water.*     Enough. 

And  now,  what  a  contempt  it  is  of  these  numerous 
miracles  to  mock  and  jeer  at  all  these  doctrines  and 
at  the  Church  which  teaches  them !  If  you  do  not 
value  the  testimony  of  antiquity,  the  testimony  of  God 
is  greater.^  What  will  you  answer  ?  For  my  part, 
I  have  only  written  here  the  first  miracles  which 
occurred  to  me,  though  I  have  taken  them  in  the 
authors  who  belong  to  *'  the  pure  Church."  If  I  had 
cited  you  the  miracles  worked  in  the  age  of  S. 
Bernard,  S.  Malachy,  S.  Bede,  S.  Francis,  your 
ministers  would  at  once  have  cried  out  that  they 
were  wonders  of  antichrist ;  but  since  every  one  admits 
that  antichrist  only  appeared  some  time  after  S. 
Gregory,  and  my  facts  all  occurred  before  or  during 
the  time  of  S.  Gregory,  no  difficulty  can  be  made. 

The  Arians  denied  the  miracle  worked  on  the  blind 
man  who  was  cured  by  touching  the  edge  of  the 
cloth  which  covered  the  relics  of  SS.  Gervase  and 
Protase,  saying  that  he  had  not  been  cured ;  S. 
Ambrose  replies :  |  "  They  deny  that  the  blind  man's 
eyes  were  opened,  but  he  does  not  deny  his  cure. 
But  I  ask,"  he  continues  a  little  further  on,  ''  why 
do  they  not  believe  ?  Do  they  maintain  that  no  one 
can  be  aided  by  the  Martyrs  ?  This  is  to  disbelieve 
Christ,  who  said :  §  Greater  things  than  these  shall  ye 
do.''  Further  on  S.  Ambrose  says :  "  They  would 
not  envy  the  works  of  the  Martyrs  unless  they  felt 
that  these  had  in  them  the  faith  which  they  them- 
selves have  not,  that  faith,  confirmed  by  the  traditions 

*  Dialog.,  1.  i.  c.  x.  t  I.  Joan,  v.  9, 

X  Sermo  vel  Epist.  supra  cit.  §  Joan,  xiv.  12. 

324  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parth. 

of  our  elders,  which  the  devils  themselves  cannot 
deny,  though  the  Arians  deny  it.  I  do  not  accept  the 
devil's  testimony  but  his  admissions."  What  circum- 
stance is  wanting  to  lift  these  miracles  above  suspicion  ? 
A  part  of  them  consists  in  the  restitution  of  the  essential 
vital  operations,  which  cannot  spring  from  other  than 
divine  power ;  the  time  in  which  they  occurred  is  quite 
close  to  that  of  Our  Lord.  The  Church  was  all  pure 
and  holy  ;  there  was  no  Antichrist  in  the  world,  as  the 
ministers  admit;  the  persons  at  whose  intercession  they 
were  effected  were  very  holy ;  the  faith  confirmed  by 
them  was  the  common  and  most  Catholic  faith ;  the 
authors  who  relate  them  are  very  safe. 

I  borrow  a  passage  for  this  place.*  "When  we 
read  in  Bouchett  the  miracles  worked  by  the  relics 
of  S.  Hilary  —  well,  his  credit  is  not  so  great  as  to 
deprive  us  of  the  liberty  of  contradicting  him ;  but 
to  condemn  out  and  out  all  such  histories  seems  to 
me  singularly  impertinent.  The  great  S.  Augustine 
testifies  that  he  saw  a  blind  man  recover  his  sight 
by  the  relics  of  SS.  Gervase  and  Protase  at  Milan; 
that  a  woman  at  Carthage  was  cured  of  a  cancer 
by  the  sign  of  the  cross  made  over  her  by  a  woman 
freshly  baptized;  that  Hesperius,  one  of  his  friends, 
had  driven  away  the  evil  spirits  that  infested  his 
house  with  a  little  earth  from  the  sepulchre  of  Our 
Lord,  which  earth  thence  transported  into  the  Church 
had  instantaneously  cured  a  paralytic  who  was  there ; 
that  in  a  certain  procession  a  woman  who  had  touched 
the  reliquary  of  S.  Stephen  with  a  bunch  of  flowers 
recovered  her  sight  by  rubbing  her  eyes  with  these 

*  Montaigne,  Essais,  1.  i.  c.  xxvi. 

t  Miracula  S.  Hilarii  (Vide  in  Actis  SS.,  die  xiii.  Januarii). 

ART.  VII.  0. 11.]        The  Rule  of  Faith.  325 

flowers.  S.  Augustine  adds  other  miracles  and  affirms 
that  he  himself  was  present  at  them.  Of  what  shall 
we  accuse  him  and  the  two  holy  bishops  Aurelius  and 
Maximin,  to  whom  he  appeals  as  his  guarantees  ?  Of 
ignorance,  simplicity,  credulity  ?  of  malice  and  impos- 
ture ?  Is  there  a  man  in  our  age  impudent  enough 
to  think  himself  comparable  with  them,  whether  in 
virtue  or  in  learning,  judgment,  and  competence  ? " 

I  say  the  same  of  the  two  Saints  Gregory  whom 
I  have  cited,  of  S.  Jerome,  S.  Chrysostom,  Atha- 
nasius,  Climacus,  Optatus,  Ambrose,  Eusebius.  Tell 
me,  for  God's  sake,  is  not  what  they  relate  quite 
possible  to  God  ?  and  if  it  be  possible  how  shall  we 
dare  to  deny  that  it  has  happened,  since  so  many 
great  personages  so  aver  ?  I  have  been  asked  more 
than  once :  Is  the  belief  in  these  histories  an  article 
of  faith  ?  No,  it  is  not  an  article  of  faith,  but  it  is 
an  article  of  good  sense  and  discretion.  It  is  too 
evidently  a  folly  and  piece  of  silly  arrogance  to 
contradict  these  ancient  and  grave  witnesses,  on  the 
simple  ground  that  what  they  say  does  not  square 
with  our  conceits.  Is  it  for  our  little  brain  to  place 
the  limits  of  truth  and  falsehood,  to  give  the  law  to 
being  or  not  being  ? 

326  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parth] 





GrOD  is  author  in  us  of  natural  reason  and  hates 
nothing  that  he  has  made,*  so  that  having  signed 
our  understanding  with  this  his  lightjt  we  must  not 
imagine  that  that  other  and  supernatural  light  which 
he  imparts  to  the  faithful,  opposes  and  contradicts  the 
natural.  They  are  daughters  of  the  same  Father,  the 
one  by  process  of  nature,  the  other  by  more  noble 
and  lofty  birth ;  they  can,  therefore,  and  should, 
live  in  harmony  together  as  loving  sisters.  Whether 
in  the  natural  or  in  the  supernatural  order,  reason 
is  always  reason,  and  truth  truth.  The  eye  which 
sees  two  steps  in  advance  amid  the  obscurity  of 
a  dark  night,  is  the  same  as  that  which,  in  the  full 
brightness  of  noon,  takes  in  the  whole  circle  of  its 
horizon,  only  the  light  wliich  serves  it  is  different ; 
so  it  is  certain  that  truth,  whether  of  nature  or 
above  nature,  is  always  the  same,  and  there  is  only 
a  difiference  in  the  light  which  displays  it  to  our 
understanding:  faith  shows  it  to  us  in  the  super- 
natural and  our  intelligence  in  the  natural,  but  truth 
is  never  at  contradiction  with  itself. 

*  Sap.  xL  23.  t  Psal.  iv.  7. 

ART.  VIII.  c.  I.]         The  Rule  of  Faith.  327 

Again,  God  who  has  given  our  senses  their  proper 
action  and  means  of  apprehending,  completes  this 
gift  by  never  permitting  them  to  be  deceived  when 
rightly  applied  to  their  proper  object ;  and  experience 
taken  by  itself,  simple  and  anterior  to  reasoning, 
cannot  mistake.  These  are  propositions  of  philosophy, 
founded  on  these  certain  premisses  that  God  himself 
is  the  author  of  our  senses,  and  as  a  holy  and 
infallible  agent  directs  them  to  their  true  end 
and  object ;  these  are  simply  first  principles,  and 
they  who  would  take  them  from  us,  would  take 
from  us  all  process  of  inference,  all  reason.  Some 
examples  will  make  us  clearly  understand  these 
propositions.  My  eye  may  make  a  mistake,  judging 
a  thing  to  be  larger  than  it  is ;  but  size  is  not 
the  proper  object  of  the  eye,  for  it  is  common 
also  to  the  touch  and  the  hand.  It  can  fall  into 
error,  again,  by  considering  that  movement  is  taking 
place  where  it  is  not ;  as  those  who  sail  along  the 
strand  seem  to  see  the  trees  and  buildings  move. 
But  movement  is  not  the  proper  object  of  my 
eye,  touch  has  its  part  also  therein.  The  eye  can 
err,  again,  when  it  is  not  properly  applied ;  for  if 
there  be  green  or  red  glass  between  it  and  its 
objects,  it  will  think  these  to  be  green  or  red  when 
they  are  not  so. 

If,  moreover,  you  add  reasoning  and  inferences  to 
the  judgments  of  the  senses  and  of  experience,  do  not 
now  attribute  your  false  conclusions  to  the  actions 
of  the  senses  or  to  experience,  for  they  are  no 
longer  pure  and  simple,  which  was  one  of  the  con- 
ditions which  I  laid  down ;  it  is  the  reasoning  and 
deductions    which    you   have    added   that    have    put 

328  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [part  11. 

you  wrong.  Thus  the  eyes  and  the  experience 
of  those  who  saw,  and  saw  experimentally  in 
Our  Lord  the  human  form  and  haviour,  were  not 
deceived,  for  the  fact  was  really  so ;  those  went 
wrong  who  drew  thence  the  consequence  that  he 
was  not  God.  The  senses  which  judge  that  there 
are  on  the  altar  the  roundness,  the  whiteness,  the 
taste  and  colour  of  bread  are  right,  but  the 
reasoning  which  concludes  that  the  substance  of 
bread  is  still  there,  is  unsound  and  false.  That 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  senses,  which  take  cog- 
nisance, not  of  the  substance  of  things  but  of  the 
accidents.  In  like  manner,  the  experience  which 
shows  us  that  we  do  not  know  how  these  accidents 
stand  without  their  natural  substance  is  quite  just, 
but  if  our  judgment  draw  the  conclusion  that  they 
do  not  so  stand,  it  deceives  itself  and  us.  This 
is  not  the  fault  of  experience,  which  has  nothing 
to  do  with  that  conclusion. 

Experience,  therefore,  and  the  judgment  of  the 
senses  are  quite  correct,  but  the  reasoning  which  we 
make  on  them  deceives  us.  Barring  this,  he  who 
denies  the  correctness  of  the  knowledge  supplied  by 
the  senses  and  by  experience,  attacks  and  overthrows 
reason;  for  the  foundation  of  all  logical  process 
depends  on  the  data  furnished  by  the  senses  and  by 
experience.  Now  how  entirely  your  ministers  have 
gone  against  experience,  sensible  cognition,  and  natu- 
ral reason,  I  will  make  clear  to  you  at  once,  provided 
that  you  do  not  reject  the  testimony  of  your  own 

ABT.  VIII.  c.  11.3        The  Rule  of  Faith.  329 



I  HAVE  put  off  the  showing  of  the  absurdities  which 
are  in  the  doctrine  of  our  adversaries  to  the  end  of 
the  treatise  on  the  rules  of  faith,  these  absurdities 
being  a  consequence  of  their  believing  without  rule 
and  sailing  without  compass.  And  [put  off  showing] 
that  they  have  not  the  efficacy  of  the  doctrine  of 
Catholicism ;  for  not  only  are  they  not  Catholics, 
but  cannot  be,  effecting  the  destruction  of  the  body 
of  Our  Lord,  instead  of  acquiring  new  members 
for  it. 

When  Luther,  in  his  preface  to  his  "  Defence  of  the 
articles  condemned  by  Leo,"  says  that  the  Scriptures 
are  very  easy,  intelligible  and  clear  to  each  one,  and 
that  any  one  can  see  the  truth  there  and  discern 
amongst  varying  opinion  which  is  the  true  which 
the  false,  is  he  not,  I  pray,  going  against  the 
personal  experience  of  everybody  ?  And  when  you 
have  taken  in  this  nonsense  do  you  not  know 
that  the  contrary  is  evident  ?  I  know  no  man  so 
learned  as  to  dare  swear  that  he  knows  the  true 
sense,  I  do  not  say  of  the  whole  Scripture  but  of 
some  part  of  it ;  indeed  I  have  never  found  one 
among  you  who  understood  the  sense  of  one  whole 

*  In  a  detached  note  the  Saint  says:  "  A  chapter  must  be  composed 
on  simplicity  of  faith  and  humility  in  believing."    See  Preface.    [Tr.] 

330  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

When  Calvin,*  or  Bucer,t  denies  that  we  have  any 
liberty  in  our  will,  not  only  for  supernatural  actions 
but  even  for  natural  ones  and  in  merely  human 
matters,  does  he  not  attack  natural  reason  and  all 
philosophy  (as  Calvin  indeed  confesses)  and,  at  the 
same  time,  the  experience  both  of  yourselves,  if  you 
speak  frankly,  and  of  all  the  rest  of  men  ? 

And  when  Luther  says  J  that  believing,  hoping, 
loving  are  not  operations  and  actions  of  our  will, 
but  simple  passions  outside  the  activity  of  the 
will,  does  he  not  ruin  at  one  stroke  all  be- 
lieving, hoping,  and  loving,  changing  them  into 
being  believed,  being  hoped  in,  and  being  loved, 
besides  contradicting  the  heart  of  man  which  knows 
well  that  by  the  grace  of  God  itself  believes,  loves, 
and  hopes  ? 

Also  when  Luther  says§  that  infants  in  Baptism 
nave  the  use  of  their  understanding  and  reason,  and 
when  the  synod  of  Wittenberg  says  ||  that  infants  in 
Baptism  have  movements  and  inclinations  like  to  the 
movements  of  faith  and  charity,  and  this  without 
understanding : — is  not  this  to  mock  God,  nature,  and 
experience  ? 

And  when  it  is  said  that  "  in  sinning  we  are  incited, 
pushed,  necessitated  by  the  will,  ordinance,  decree, 
and  predestination  of  God," — is  this  not  to  blaspheme 
against  all  reason,  and  against  the  majesty  of  the 
supreme   goodness  ?      Such   is   the   fine   theology   of 

*  histit,  1.  i.  c.  xvi.,  1.  ii.  cc.  ii.,  iv, 

t  De  Concord.,  art.  de  lib.  arbitr. 

X  Operat  in  Psalm. 

§  Apud  Cochl.,  ann.  1523. 

Ii  Ann.  1536.  L.  3  :  Misceli.  tract. 

ART.  VIII.  c.  II.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  331 

Zwingle,  Calvin,  and  Beza.*  "  But,"  says  Beaa,  "  you 
will  say  that  they  could  not  resist  the  will  of  God, 
that  is,  the  decree;  I  acknowledge  it:  but  as  they 
could  not  so  they  would  not :  they  could  not  wish 
otherwise,  I  own,  as  to  the  event  and  working  {ener- 
giam),  but  yet  the  will  of  Adam  was  not  forced." 
Goodness  of  God,  I  call  you  as  my  witness  !  You  have 
pushed  me  to  do  evil ;  you  have  so  decreed,  ordained, 
and  willed ;  I  could  not  act  otherwise,  I  could  not 
will  otherwise, — what  fault  of  mine  is  there  ?  0  God 
of  my  heart !  chastise  my  will,  if  it  is  able  not  to  will 
evil  and  wills  to  will  it ;  but  if  it  cannot  help  willing 
evil,  and  thou  art  the  cause  of  its  impossibility,  what 
fault  of  mine  can  there  be  ?  If  this  is  not  contrary 
to  reason,  I  protest  that  there  is  no  reason  in  the 

The  law  of  God  is  impossible,  according  to  Calvin 
and  the  others :  t  what  follows,  except  that  Our  Lord 
is  a  tyrant  who  commands  impossible  things  ?  If  it 
is  impossible,  why  is  it  commanded  ? 

Works,  good  as  ever  they  may  be,  rather  deserve 
hell  than  Paradise :  shall  then  the  justice  of  God, 
which  will  give  to  every  one  according  to  his  works, 
give  to  every  one  hell  ? 

This  is  enough,  but  the  absurdity  of  absurdities,  and 
the  most  horrible  unreason  of  all  is  this :  that  while 
holding  that  the  whole  Church  may  have  erred  for 
a  thousand  years  in  the  understanding  of  the  Word  of 
God,  Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin  can  guarantee  that  they 
understand  it  aright :  this  absurdity  is  greater  when 

*  Zw.  de  prud.  5,  6 :  Calv.  Jnstit.  I.   17,  18  ;  de  Praed.  ;  Instruct, 
contra  Lib. ;  Beza  contra  Castal. 

+  Calv.  mU.  Sess.  6,  cone.  Tr. :  Luther  de  lib.  Chrut. 

332  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [part  a 

a  mere  wretched  minister  (ministrot),  while  preaching 
as  a  word  of  God  that  all  the  visible  Church  has  erred, 
that  Calvin  and  all  men  can  err,  dares  to  pick  and 
choose  amongst  the  interpretations  of  the  Scripture 
that  one  which  pleases  him,  and  to  certify  and  main- 
tain it  as  the  Word  of  God :  and  you  yourselves  carry 
the  absurdity  still  further  when,  having  heard  that 
everybody  may  err  in  matter  of  religion — even  the 
whole  Church — without  trying  to  find  for  yourselves 
some  other  religion  amongst  a  thousand  sects,  which 
all  boast  of  rightly  understanding  the  Word  of  God, 
and  rightly  preaching  it,  you  believe  so  obstinately 
in  the  minister  who  preaches  to  you,  that  you  will 
hear  no  more  ?  If  everybody  can  err  in  the  under- 
standing of  the  Scripture,  why  not  you  and  your 
minister?  I  wonder  that  you  do  not  always  walk 
trembling  and  shaking :  I  wonder  how  you  can  live 
with  so  much  assurance  in  the  doctrine  which  you 
follow,  as  if  you  could  not  err,  and  yet  you  hold  as 
certain  that  every  one  has  erred  and  can  err. 

The  Gospel  soars  far  above  all  the  most  elevated 
reasonings  of  nature  ;  it  never  goes  against  them,  never 
injures  them  nor  dissolves  them :  but  these  fancies  of 
your  evangelists  obscure  and  destroy  the  light  of 

ART.  VIII.  0.  iiL]       The  Rule  of  Faith.  333 



It  is  a  saying  full  of  pride  and  ambition  amongst 
your  ministers,  and  one  which  is  ordinary  with  them, 
that  we  must  interpret  the  Scriptures  and  test  the 
exposition  of  them  by  the  analogy  of  the  faith.  The 
simple  people  when  they  hear  this  analogy  of  the 
faith,  think  that  it  is  some  word  of  secret  potency  and 
cabalistic  virtue ;  and  they  wonderingly  admire  every 
interpretation  which  is  given,  provided  that  this  word 
be  brought  into  the  field.  In  truth  the  ministers  are 
right  when  they  say  that  we  must  interpret  the 
Scripture,  and  prove  our  expositions  of  it  by  the 
analogy  of  faith  ;  but  they  are  wrong  in  not  doing 
what  they  say.  The  poor  people  hear  nothing  but 
their  bragging  about  this  analogy  of  faith,  and  the 
ministers  do  nothing  but  corrupt,  spoil,  force  it,  and 
tear  it  to  shreds.  Let  us  look  into  this,  I  beg  you. 
You  say  that  the  Scripture  is  easy  to  understand,  pro- 
vided that  one  adjust  it  to  the  rule  and  proportion, 
or  analogy,  of  the  faith.  But  what  rule  of  faith  can 
they  have  who  have  no  Scripture  except  one  entirely 
glossed,  wrested,  and  strained  by  interpretations, 
metaphors,  metonymies  ?  If  the  rule  is  subject  to 
irregularity,  who  shall  regulate  it  ?  And  what  analogy 
or  proportion  of  faith  can  there  be,  if  a  man  propor- 
tion the  articles  of  faith  with  conceptions  the  most 
foreign  to  their  true  sense  ?  If  the  fact  of  proportion 
with  the  articles  of  faith  is  to  serve  you  to   decide 

334  l'^^  Catholic  Controversy.         [pabt  n. 

upon  doctrine  and  religion,  leave  the  articles  of  faith 
in  their  natural  shape;  do  not  give  them  a  form 
different  from  that  which  they  have  received  from 
the  Apostles.  I  leave  you  to  guess  what  use  the 
Symbol  of  the  Apostles  can  be  to  me  in  interpreting 
the  Scriptures,  when  you  gloss  it  in  such  a  way  that 
you  put  me  in  greater  difficulties  about  its  sense  than 
ever  I  was  in  about  the  Scriptures  themselves. 

If  any  one  ask  how  the  same  body  of  Our  Lord 
can  come  to  be  in  two  places,  I  shall  say  that  this  is 
easy  to  God,  and  I  shall  confirm  it  by  this  reason  of 
faith :  /  believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty.  But  if 
you  gloss  both  the  Scripture  and  the  article  of  faith 
itself,  how  will  you  confirm  your  gloss  ?  At  this 
rate  there  will  be  no  first  principle  except  your 
notions.  If  the  analogy  of  faith  be  subject  to  your 
glosses  and  opinions,  you  must  say  so  openly,  that  we 
may  know  what  you  are  at,  which  will  now  be  this — 
to  interpret  Scripture  by  Scripture  and  analogy,  ad- 
justing everything  to  your  own  interpretations  and 
ideas.  I  apply  the  whole  question  [of  the  Eeal 
Presence]  *  to  the  analogy  of  the  faith :  this  explana- 
tion agrees  perfectly  with  that  first  word  of  the  Creed 
where  Credo  takes  away  all  difficulties  of  human 
reason ;  the  omnipotentem  strengthens  me,  the  mention 
of  creation  heartens  me ; — for  why  sliall  he  who 
made  all  things  out  of  nothing,  not  make  the  body  of 
Christ  out  of  bread  ?  That  name  of  Jesus  comforts 
me,  for  his  mercy  and  his  will  to  do  great  things  for 
me  are  there  expressed.  That  he  is  the  Son,  consub- 
stantial  with  the  Father,,  proves  to  me  his  illimitable 
power.     His  being  conceived  of  a    Virgin,  against  the 

*  See  Preface. 

ART.  vTii.  c.  III.]       The  Rule  of  Faith,  335 

course  of  nature ;  his  not  disdaining  to  lodge  within 
her  for  our  sakes ;  his  being  horn  with  penetration  of 
dimension,  an  act  which  goes  beyond  and  above  the 
nature  of  a  body — these  things  assure  me  both  of  his 
will   and  of  his  power.     His   dmth  supports  me ; — 
for  he  who  died  for  us,  what  will  he  not  do  for  us  ? 
His  se'pulchre  cheers  me,  and  his  descent  into  hell ; — 
for  I  shall  not  doubt  his  descent  into  the  obscurity  of 
my  body,  &c.     His  resurrection  gives  me  fresh  life ; 
for   this   new   penetration   of  the   stone,   the   agility, 
subtlety,  brightness,    and    impassibility   of   his   body, 
are  no  longer  according  to  the  grosser  laws  which  we 
conceive    of.     His   ascension  makes   me   rise   to   this 
faith  ; — for  if  his  body  penetrate  matter,  raise  itself, 
by  his  sole  will,  and  place  itself,  without  place,  at  the 
right  hand  of  the  Father,  why  shall  it  not,  here  below, 
be  where  seems  good  to  him,  and  occupy  space  only 
as  he  wills  it  to  do  ?     His  being  seated  at  the  right 
hand  of  the  Father  shows  me  that  everything  is  put 
under  him,  heaven,  earth,  distances,  places,  dimensions. 
T\idX  from  thence  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  living  and 
the  dead,  urges  me  to  the  belief  of  the  illimitability  of 
his  glory,  and  [teaches  me]  therefore  that  his  glory  is 
not  attached  to  place,  but  that  wherever  he  goes  he 
carries  it  with  him ; — he  is,  then,  in  the  most  holy 
Sacrament  without  quitting  his  glory  or  his  perfec- 
tions.    That  Holy  Ghost,  by  whose  operation  he  was 
conceived  and  born  of  a  Virgin,  can  equally  well  by 
his  operation  effect  this  admirable  work  of  Transub- 
stantiation.      The   Church,  which  is  holy  and  cannot 
lead  us  into  error,  which  is  Catholic  and  therefore  is 
not  restricted  to  this  miserable  world,  but  is  to  extend 
in  length  from  the  Apostles,  in  breadth  throughout 

S3^  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth, 

the  world,  in  depth  as  far  as  to  Purgatory,  in  height 
to  heaven,  including  all  nations,  all  past  ages, 
canonised  saints,  our  forefathers  of  whom  we  have 
hope,  prelates,  councils  old  and  recent — [she,  through 
all  these  her  members]  sings  in  every  place,  Amen, 
Amen,  to  this  holy  belief. 

This  is  the  perfect  Communion  of  Saints,  for  it  is 
the  food  common  to  angels,  and  sainted  souls  in 
Paradise,  and  ourselves ;  it  is  the  true  bread  of  which 
all  Christians  participate.  The  forgiveness  of  sins^  the 
author  of  forgiveness  being  there,  is  confirmed;  the 
seed  of  our  resurrection  sown,  life  everlasting  bestowed. 
Where  do  you  find  contradiction  in  this  holy  analogy 
of  faith  ?  So  much  the  reverse,  that  this  very  belief 
in  the  most  holy  Sacrament,  which  in  truth,  reality, 
and  substance,  contains  the  true  and  natural  body  of 
Our  Lord,  is  actually  the  abridgment  of  our  faith, 
according  to  that  of  the  Psalmist :  ^  He  hath  made  a 
memory  [of  his  wonderful  works'].  0  holy  and  perfect 
memorial  of  the  Gospel !  0  admirable  summing  up 
of  our  faith !  He  who  believes,  0  Lord,  in  Your 
presence  in  this  most  holy  Sacrament,  as  Your  holy 
Church  proposes  it,  has  gathered  and  sucked  the  sweet 
honey  of  all  the  flowers  of  Your  holy  Eeligion  :  hardly 
can  he  ever  fail  in  faith. 

But  I  return  to  you,  gentlemen,  and  simply  ask 
what  passages  you  will  any  longer  oppose  to  me  against 
such  clear  ones  as  these — This  is  my  hody.  That 
the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  ?  t — no,  not  yours  or  mine, 
which  are  but  carrion,  nor  our  carnal  sentiments ; 
not  mere  flesh,  dead,  without  spirit  or  life ;  but  that 
of  the  Saviour  which  is  ever  furnished  with  the  life- 

*  ex.  4.  t  John  VI. 

ART.  VIII.  0.  III.]       The  Rule  of  Faith,  337 

giving  Spirit,  and  with  his  Word.  I  say  that  it 
profits  unto  life  eternal  all  who  worthily  receive  it : 
what  say  you  ? — that  the  words  of  Our  Lord  are  spirit 
and  life  ?  * — who  denies  it  save  yourselves,  when  you 
say  they  are  but  tropes  and  figures  ?  But  what 
sense  is  there  in  this  consequence : — the  words  of 
Our  Lord  are  spirit  and  life,  therefore  they  are  not 
to  be  understood  of  his  body  ?  And  when  he  said : 
The  Son  of  man  shall  be  delivered  up  to  ie  mocked  and 
scourged,  &c.t  (I  take  as  examples  the  first  that  come), 
were  his  words  not  spirit  and  life  ? — say  then  that 
he  was  crucified  in  figure.  When  he  said :  If  there- 
fore you  see  the  Son  of  man  ascending  vjhere  he  was 
before  (John  vi.),  does  it  follow  that  he  only  ascended 
in  figure  ?  And  still  these  words  are  comprised 
among  the  rest,  of  which  he  said :  They  are  spirit  and 
life.  Finally,  in  the  Holy  Sacrament,  as  in  the  holy 
words  of  our  Lord,  the  spirit  is  there  which  vivifies 
the  flesh,  otherwise  it  would  profit  nothing ;  but  none 
the  less  is  the  flesh  there  with  its  life  and  its  spirit. 
What  further  will  you  say  ? — that  this  Sacrament  is 
called  bread  ?  So  it  is ;  but  as  Our  Lord  explains : 
/  am  the  living  bread  (lb.)  These  are  fully  sufficient 
examples : — as  for  you,  what  can  you  show  like 
these  ?  I  show  you  an  is,  show  me  the  is  not,  which 
you  maintain,  or  the  signifies.  I  have  shown  you  the 
body  J  show  me  your  effectual  sign ;  seek,  turn,  turn 
again,  make  your  spirit  spin  as  fast  as  you  like,  and 
you  shall  never  find  it.  At  the  very  most  you  will 
show  that  when  the  words  are  somewhat  strained,  a 
few  phrases  in  the  Scriptures  may  be  found  like  those 
you  pretend  to  find  here ;  but  to  esse  from  posse  is  a 

*  lb.  i  Luke  xviii.  32. 

III.  y 

^;^S  The  Catholic  Controversy.  [parth. 

lame  consequence :  I  say  that  you  cannot  make  them 
fit;  I  say  that  if  everybody  takes  them  as  he  likes, 
the  greater  number  will  take  them  wrongly.  But  let 
us  just  see  a  piece  of  this  work  while  it  is  being  done. 
You  produce  for  your  belief :  The  luords  which  I  speak 
are  spirit  and  life  ;  and  this  you  fasten  on :  As  often 
as  you  shall  eat  this  bread ;  you  add :  Do  this  in  com- 
memoration  of  me  ;  you  bring  up :  Tou  shall  show  forth 
the  death  of  the  Lord  until  he  comes;*  But  me  you 
shall  not  have  always.  But  consider  a  little  what 
reference  these  words  have  to  one  another.  You 
adjust  all  this  to  the  anomologyt  of  your  faith,  and 
how  ?  Our  Lord  is  seated  at  the  right  hand,  therefore 
he  is  not  here.  Show  me  the  thread  with  which  you 
sew  this  negative  to  this  affirmative : — because  a  body 
cannot  be  in  two  places.  Ah !  you  said  you  would 
join  your  negative  with  analogy  by  the  thread  of 
Scripture : — where  is  this  Scripture,  that  a  body 
cannot  be  in  two  places  ?  Just  observe  how  you 
mingle  the  profane  employment  of  a  merely  human 
reason  with  the  Sacred  Word  ?  But,  say  you,  Our 
Lord  will  come  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead  from 
the  right  hand  of  his  Father.  What  does  this  prove  ? 
If  it  were  necessary  for  him  to  come,  in  order  to 
become  present  in  the  Holy  Sacrament,  your  analogy 
would  have  some  speciousness,  though  not  even  then 
any  reality, — for  when  he  does  come  to  judge  nobody 
says  that  it  will  be  on  earth ;  the  fire  will  precede. 
There  is  your  analogy :  in  good  earnest  which  has 
worked  the  better,  you  or  I  ? 

*  I  Cor.  xi  ;  John  xii. 

t  kvofioKoyM,  i.e.,  disproportion.     A  play  on  the  word  Analogy. 

ART.  VIII.  0.  III.]       The  Rule  of  Faiths  339 

If  we  let  you  interpret  the  Descent  of  Our  Lord 
into  hell  as  of  the  Sepulchre,  or  as  of  a  fear  of  hell  and 
of  the  pains  of  the  damned, — the  sanctity  of  the  Church 
as  the  sanctity  of  an  invisible  and  unknown  Church, — 
its  universality  as  that  of  a  secret  and  hidden  Church, 
— the  Communion  of  Saints  as  simply  a  general  bene- 
volence,— the  remission  of  sins  as  only  a  non-imputa- 
tion ; — when  you  shall  have  thus  proportioned  the 
Creed  to  your  judgment,  it  will  certainly  be  in  good 
proportion  with  the  rest  of  your  doctrine,  but  who 
does  not  see  the  absurdity  ?  The  Creed,  which  is 
the  instruction  of  the  most  simple,  would  be  the  most 
obscure  doctrine  in  the  world,  and  while  it  has  to  be 
the  rule  of  faith,  it  would  have  to  be  regulated  by 
another  rule.  The  wicked  walk  round  about.^  One 
infallible  rule  of  our  faith  is  this :  God  is  All-mighty. 
He  who  says  all  excludes  nothing,  and  you  would 
regulate  this  rule,  and  would  limit  it  so  that  it  should 
not  extend  as  far  as  absolute  power,  or  the  power  of 
placing  a  body  in  two  places,  or  of  placing  it  in  one 
without  its  occupying  exterior  space.  Tell  me,  then 
— if  the  rule  need  regulation,  who  shall  regulate  it  ? 
Similarly  the  Creed  says  that  Our  Lord  descended  into 
hell,  and  Calvin  would  rule  that  this  is  to  be  under- 
stood of  an  imaginary  descent;  somebody  else  refers 
it  to  the  sepulchre.  Is  not  this  to  treat  the  rule  as 
a  Lesbian  one,  and  to  make  the  level  bend  to  the  stone 
instead  of  cutting  the  stone  by  the  level.  Indeed  as 
S.    Clement t  and    S.  Augustine;];  call  it  rule,  so    S, 

*  Ps,  xi.  • 

t  We  do  not  find  this  passage  in  any  authentic  work  of  S.  Clement 

X  Serm.  213,  alias  119. 

340  ^-^^^  Catholic  Controversy,  [partil 

Ambrose  *  calls  it  key.  But  if  another  key  be  re- 
quired to  open  this  key  where  shall  we  find  it  ?  Is 
it  to  be  the  fancy  of  your  ministers,  or  what  ?  Will 
it  be  the  Holy  Spirit  ? — but  everybody  will  boast  that 
he  has  a  share  in  this.  Good  heavens !  into  what 
labyrinths  do  they  fall  who  quit  the  path  of  the 
Ancients !  I  would  not  have  you  think  me  ignorant 
of  this,  that  the  Creed  alone  is  not  the  whole  rule 
and  measure  of  faith.  For  both  S.  Ausfustinet  and 
the  great  Vincent  of  LerinsJ  also  call  the  sense  of 
the  Church  {sentiment  Ecclesiastique)  rule  of  our  faith. 
The  Creed  alone  says  nothing  openly  of  the  Consub- 
stantiality,  of  the  Sacraments,  or  of  other  articles  of 
faith,  but  comprehends  the  whole  faith  in  its  root  and 
foundation,  particularly  when  it  teaches  us  to  believe 
the  Church  to  be  holy  and  Catholic ; — for  by  this  it 
sends  us  to  what  the  Church  shall  propose.  But  as 
you  despise  the  whole  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church, 
you  also  despise  this  noble,  this  notable  and  excellent 
part  of  it,  which  is  the  Creed,  refusing  belief  in  it 
until  you  have  reduced  it  to  the  petty  scale  of  your 
conceptions.  Thus  do  you  violate  this  holy  measure 
and  proportion  which  S.  Paul  requires  to  be  followed, 
yea,  even  by  the  prophets  themselves.^ 

*  Appendix,  Serm.  33.     More  probably  belongs  to  S.  Maximus  of 
Turin.     [Tr.] 

t  Contra  Ep.   Fund  4,  $.  %  Comm.  c.  ii.  §  i  Cor.  xiv 

ART.  VIII.  0.  IV.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  341 


OUR   AGE.* 

Sailing  thus  then  without  needle,  compass  or  rudder 
on  the  ocean  of  human  opinions,  you  can  expect 
nothing  but  a  miserable  shipwreck.  Ah!  I  implore 
you,  while  this  day  lasts,  while  God  presents  you  the 
opportunity,  throw  yourselves  into  the  saving  bark  of 
a  serious  repentance,  and  take  refuge  on  the  happy 
vessel  which  is  bound  under  full  sail  for  the  port  of 

If  there  were  nothing  else,  do  you  not  recognise 
what  advantages  and  excellences  the  Catholic  doctrine 
has  beyond  your  opinions  ?  The  Catholic  doctrine 
makes  more  glorious  and  magnificent  the  goodness  and 
mercy  of  God,  your  opinions  lower  them.  For  example, 
is  there  not  more  mercy  in  establishing  the  reality  of 
his  body  for  our  food  than  in  only  giving  the  figure 
and  commemoration  thereof  and  the  eating  by  faith 
alone  ?  All  seek  the  things  that  are  their  oiun,  not  the 
things  that  are  Jesus  Christ's  (Phil.  ii.  21).  Is  it  not 
more  honourable  to   concede  to   the  might  of  Jesus 


*  This  cliapter  seems  to  fulfil  the  design  referred  to  in  the  following 
detached  note  of  the  Saint's  :  "  A  chapter  is  also  to  be  composed  on  the 
greater  glory  of  the  Gospel  in  the  faith  of  Catholics  than  in  the  faith 
of  the  heretics.  Where  reference  is  to  be  made  to  what  was  said  at 
the  end  of  the  chapter  de  visibili  [Pt.  L  c.  6.],  viz.,  that  in  the  visible 
Church  the  eye  of  mind  and  of  body  is  fed,  in  the  invisible  neither." 

342  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [paktil 

Christ  the  power  to  make  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  as 
the  Church  believes  it,  and  to  his  goodness  the  will  to 
do  so,  than  the  contrary  ?  Without  doubt  it  is  more 
glorious  to  Our  Lord.  Yet  because  our  mind  cannot 
comprehend  it,  in  order  to  uphold  our  own  mind,  all 
seek  the  things  that  are  their  own,  not  the  things  that  are 
Jesus  Christ's.  Is  it  not  more,  in  justifying  man,  to 
embellish  his  soul  with  grace,  than  without  embellish- 
ing it  to  justify  him  by  a  simple  toleration  (connivence) 
or  non-imputation  ?  Is  it  not  a  greater  favour  to 
make  man  and  his  works  agreeable  and  good  than 
simply  to  take  man  as  good  without  his  being  so  in 
reality  ?  Is  it  not  more  to  have  left  seven  Sacraments 
for  the  justification  and  sanctification  of  the  sinner 
than  to  have  left  only  two,  one  of  which  serves  for 
nothing  and  the  other  for  little  ?  Is  it  not  more  to 
have  left  the  power  of  absolving  in  the  Church  than 
to  have  left  it  not  ?  Is  it  not  more  to  have  left  a 
Church  visible,  universal,  of  striking  aspect,  perpetual, 
than  to  have  left  it  little,  secret,  scattered  and  liable 
to  corruption  ?  Is  it  not  to  value  more  the  travails 
of  Jesus  Christ  when  we  say  that  a  single  drop  of  his 
blood  suffices  to  ransom  the  world,  than  to  say  that 
unless  he  had  endured  the  pains  of  the  damned  he 
would  have  done  nothing  ?  Is  not  the  mercy  of  God 
more  magnified  in  giving  to  his  saints  the  knowledge 
of  what  takes  place  here  below,  the  honour  of  praying 
for  us,  in  making  himself  ready  to  accept  their  inter- 
cession, in  having  glorified  them  as  soon  as  they  died, 
than  in  making  them  wait  and  keeping  them  in  sus- 
pense, according  to  Calvin's  words,  until  the  judgment, 
in  making  them  deaf  to  our  prayers  and  remaining  him- 
self inexorable  to  theirs.    This  will  be  seen  more  clearly 

ART.  VIII.  0.  IV.]        The  Rule  of  Faith,  343 

in  our  treatment  of  particular  points.  Our  doctrine 
[then]  makes  more  admirable  the  power  of  God  in  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  in  justification  and  inherent 
justice,  in  miracles,  in  the  infallible  preservation  of 
the  Church,  in  the  glory  of  the  Saints. 

The  Catholic  doctrine  cannot  have  its  source  in  any 
passion,  because  nobody  follows  it  save  on  this  condi- 
tion, of  captivating  his  intelligence,  under  the  authority 
of  the  pastors.  It  is  not  proud,  since  it  teaches  not 
to  believe  self  but  the  Church.  What  shall  I  say 
further  ?  Distinguish  the  voice  of  the  dove  from  that 
of  the  crow.  Do  you  not  see  this  Spouse,  who  has 
nought  but  honey  and  milk  under  her  tongue,  who 
breathes  only  the  greater  glory  of  her  Beloved,  his 
honour  and  obedience  to  him  ?  Ah  !  then,  gentlemen, 
be  willing  to  be  placed  as  living  stones  in  the  walls 
of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem.  Take  yourselves  out  of 
the  hands  of  these  men  who  build  without  a  rule,  who 
do  not  adjust  their  conceptions  to  the  faith,  but  the 
faith  to  their  conceptions.  Come  and  offer  yourselves 
to  the  Church,  who  will  place  you,  unless  you  prevent 
her,  in  the  heavenly  building,  according  to  the  true 
rule  and  proportion  of  faith.  For  never  shall  any  one 
have  a  place  there  above  who  has  not  been  worked 
and  laid,  according  to  rule  and  square,  here  below. 

[The  following  detached  notes  of  the  Saint  bear 
upon  the  matter  of  the  foregoing  chapter.      Tr.] 

All  the  ancient  sacrifices  of  a  farinaceous  nature 
were  as  it  were  the  condiment  of  the  bloody  sacrifices. 
So  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Eucharist  is  as  it  were  the 
condiment  of  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Cross,  and  with  most 
excellent  reason  united  to  it. 

344  The  Catholic  Controversy,  [pabtil 

The  Church  is  a  mountain,  heresy  a  valley :  for 
heretics  go  down,  from  the  Church  that  errs  not  to  an 
erring  one,  from  truth  to  shadow. 

Ismael,  who  signified  the  Jewish  synagogue  (Gal.  iv), 
was  cast  out  when  he  would  play  with  Isaac,  that  is, 
the  Catholic  Church.     How  much  more  heretics,  &c. 

That  of  Isaias  (liv.  17)  agrees  excellently  with  the 
Church  as  against  heresy :  No  weapon  that  is  formed 
against  thee  shall  prosper;  and  every  tongue  that 
resisteth  thee  in  judgment  thou  shalt  condemn.  This  is 
the  inheritance  of  the  servants  of  the  Lord^  and  their 
justice  with  me,  saith  the  Lord. 

Cburcb  Doctrines  anb  Jnetitutiona. 


These  two  fundamental  faults  into  which  your  ministers 
have  led  you,  namely,  the  having  abandoned  the 
Church  and  the  having  violated  all  the  true  rules  of 
the  Christian  religion,  make  you  altogether  inexcusable, 
gentlemen.  For  they  are  so  gross  that  you  cannot 
but  know  them,  and  so  important  that  either  of  the 
two  suffices  to  make  you  lose  true  Christianity :  since 
neither  faith  without  the  Church  nor  the  Church 
without  faith  can  save  you,  any  more  than  the  eye 
without  the  head  or  the  head  without  the  eye  could 
see  the  light.  Whoever  would  separate  you  from 
union  with  the  Church  should  be  suspected  by  you, 
and  whoever  should  so  greatly  infringe  the  holy  rules 
of  the  faith  ought  to  be  avoided  and  disregarded, 
whatever  his  appearance  might  be,  whatever  he  might 
allege.  You  should  not  have  so  lightly  believed. 
Had  you  been  prudent  in  your  way  of  acting  you 
would  have  seen  that  it  was  not  the  Word  of  God  they 
brought  forward  but    their  own    ideas   veiled   under 

34^  The  Catholic  Controversy.  ^       [pabthi. 

words  of  Scripture,  and  you  would  have  known  well 
that  so  rich  a  dress  was  never  made  for  covering  so 
worthless  a  body  as  this  heresy  is. 

For,  by  supposition,  let  us  say  that  there  was  never 
Church,  nor  Council,  nor  pastor,  nor  doctor,  since  the 
Apostles,  and  that  the  Holy  Scripture  contains  only 
those  books  which  it  pleases  Calvin,  Beza,  and  Martyr 
to  acknowledge;  that  there  is  no  infallible  rule  for 
understanding  it  rightly,  but  that  it  is  at  the  mercy  of 
the  notions  of  everybody  who  likes  to  maintain  that 
he  is  interpreting  Scripture  by  Scripture,  and  by  the 
analogy  of  the  faith, — as  one  might  say  he  would  get 
to  understand  Aristotle  by  Aristotle  and  by  the 
analogy  of  philosophy.  Only  let  us  acknowledge  that 
this  Scripture  is  divine.  And  I  maintain  before  all 
equitable  judges  that  if  not  all,  at  least  those  amongst 
you  who  had  some  knowledge  and  ability,  are  inexcus- 
able, and  cannot  defend  their  choice  of  religion  from 
lightness  and  rashness. 

And  here  is  what  I  come  to.  The  ministers  will 
only  fight  on  Scripture ;  I  am  willing.  They  will 
only  have  such  parts  of  Scripture  as  they  chose ;  I 
ageee.  And  still  I  say  that  the  belief  of  the  Catholic 
Church  beats  them  completely,  since  she  has  more 
passages  in  her  favour  than  the  contrary  opinion  has, 
and  her  passages  are  more  clear,  more  simple,  more 
pure,  interpreted  more  reasonably,  more  conclusive,  and 
more  apt.  This  I  believe  to  be  so  certain  that  every 
one  may  come  to  know  and  recognise  it.  But  if  we 
would  show  this  in  minute  detail  we  should  never 
finish ;  it  will  be  quite  enough,  I  think,  to  show  it  in 
some  of  the  chief  articles. 

It  is  this  then  that  I  profess  to  do  in  this  Third 

iNTROD.]  Church  Doctrines,  <2fc.  347 

Part,  in  which  I  shall  attack  your  ministers  on  the 
Sacraments  in  general,  and  in  particular  on  those  of 
the  Eucharist,  Confession,  and  Marriage ;  on  the  honour 
and  invocation  of  the  saints;  on  the  propriety  of 
ceremonies  in  general ;  then  in  particular  on  the 
merit  of  good  works,  on  justification,  and  on  indul- 
gences. In  this  I  will  employ  nought  but  the  pure 
and  simple  Word  of  God;  with  which  alone  I  will 
make  you  see,  by  examples,  your  fault  so  clearly  that 
you  will  be  bound  to  repent  of  it.  And  meantime 
I  beg  of  you,  that  if  you  see  me  engage,  and  at  length 
overcome  the  enemy  with  Scripture  alone,  you  will 
then  represent  to  yourselves  that  great  and  honourable 
succession  of  martyrs,  pastors,  and  doctors,  who  have 
testified  by  their  teaching  and  at  the  price  of  their 
blood  that  this  doctrine  for  which  we  now  fight  was 
the  holy,  the  original,  the  Apostolic ;  which  will  be  as 
it  were  a  superfluity  of  victory ;  so  that  if  we  found 
ourselvas  on  an  equality  with  our  enemies  by  Scrip- 
ture alone,  the  antiquity,  the  agreement,  the  holiness 
of  our  authors  would  still  make  us  triumph.  And  in 
doing  this  I  will  ever  adjust  the  sense  and  bearing  of 
the  Scriptures  which  I  shall  produce  to  the  rules  which 
I  have  established  in  the  Second  Part,  although  my 
chief  design  is  only  to  give  you  a  proof  of  the  hollow- 
ness  of  your  ministers,  who  do  nothing  but  cry  out 
Holy  Scripture,  Holy  Scripture,  yet  all  they  effect  is 
to  contradict  its  clearest  statements.  In  the  assembly 
of  the  Princes  which  took  place  at  Spires,  in  the  year 
1526,  the  Protestant  ministers  wore  these  letters  on 
the  right  sleeve  of  their  dress :  V.  D.  M.  I.  M.,  by 
which  they  meant  to  declare  Verhum  Domini  manet 
in  ceternum  [the  Word  of  the  Lord  remaineth  for  ever]. 

34^  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [partiu 

Would  you  not  say  that  they  had  a  monopoly  of  Holy 
Scripture  ?  They  quote  indeed  morsels  of  it,  and  on 
every  occasion,  "  in  public  and  in  private,"  says  the 
great  Lirinensis,*  "  in  their  discourses,  in  their  books, 
in  the  streets,  and  at  banquets.  .  .  .  Eead  the  works 
of  Paul  of  Samosata,  of  Priscillian,  of  Eunomius,  of 
Jovinian,  and  of  those  other  pests  :  you  will  see  a  great 
heap  of  examples,  and  scarcely  a  page  which  is  not 
painted  and  adorned  with  sentences  out  of  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament.  .  .  .  They  act  like  those  do 
who,  wishing  to  get  little  children  to  take  some  bitter 
potion,  rub  and  cover  with  honey  the  rim  of  the  cup, 
in  order  that  infant  simplicity  tasting  the  sweet  first 
may  not  be  frightened  of  the  bitter."  But  he  who 
sounds  the  depths  of  their  doctrine  will  see  clearly  as 
the  day  that  it  is  but  a  painted  sham,  like  what  the  devil 
brought  forward  when  he  tempted  Our  Lord.  For  he 
quoted  Scripture  to  his  purpose.  "  What,"  says  the 
same  Lirinensis,t  "  will  he  not  do  with  wretched  man, 
when  he  dares  to  attack  with  words  of  Scripture  the  very 
Lord  of  majesty  ?  Let  us  look  closely  at  the  doctrine  of 
this  passage.  .  .  .  For  as  then  the  head  of  one  party 
spoke  to  the  head  of  the  other,  so  now  members  speak 
to  members ;  namely,  the  members  of  the  devil  to  the 
members  of  Jesus  Christ,  unbelievers  to  the  faithful, 
the  sacrilegious  to  the  religious — in  a  word,  heretics  to 
Catholics."  But  as  the  head  answered  the  head,  so 
can  we  members  answer  the  non-members.  Our  head 
repulsed  their  chief  with  passages  of  the  Scripture, 
let  us  repulse  them  in  like  fashion,  and  by  solid  and 
plain  consequences,  deduced  from  Holy  Scripture,  let 
us  show  their  falseness  and  deceitfulness  in  covering 

*  Comm.  xx^v.  +  lb.  xxxviL 

ART.  1. 0.  L]         Church  Doctrines,  &c,  349 

their  fancies  with  the  words  of  Scripture.  This  is 
what  I  intend  to  do  here,  but  briefly,  and  I  protest 
that  I  will  produce  most  faithfully  what  seems  to  me 
to  be  most  in  their  favour,  and  convict  them  from 
the  Scripture  itself.  Thus  will  you  come  to  see  that 
though  they  and  we  use  and  fight  with  the  Scripture, 
yet  we  have  the  reality  and  right  usage  of  them,  and 
they  only  have  the  vain  and  illusive  appearance.  So 
both  Aaron  and  the  magicians  changed  their  rods  into 
living  serpents,  but  the  rod  of  Aaron  devoured  the 
rods  of  the  others. 

AETICLE  I.  ^i     ^  "^^^  f^  :% 

OF  THE  SACRAMENTS.    \  ^-    ^'^^*S}^^, 



This  word  Sacrament  is  explicitly  used  in  Scripture 
in  the  meaning  which  it  has  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
since  S.  Paul,  speaking  of  marriage,  calls  it  clearly 
and  precisely  Sacrament.*  But  we  shall  see  this  by 
and  by.  It  is  enough  now,  against  the  insolence  of 
Zwinglet  and  others  who  would  reject  this  name, 
that  the  whole  ancient  Church  has  used  it.  For  it  is 
not  by  any  greater  authority  that  the  words  Trinity, 
consubstantial,  person,  and  a  hundred  others,  have 
been  received  in  the  Church  as  holy  and  legitimate. 
But  it  is  a  most  unprofitable  and  foolish  rashness  to 

*  Eph.  V.  t  De  verd  etfals.  relig. 

350  The  Catholic  Controversy.        [parthi. 

attempt  to  change  the  Ecclesiastical  words  which 
antiquity  has  left  us :  to  say  nothing  of  the  danger 
that  there  might  be,  after  changing  the  words,  of 
going  on  to  the  change  of  the  meaning  and  belief, — as 
we  see  to  be  ordinarily  the  aim  of  these  innovators 
on  words.  Now  since  the  pretended  reformers  for  the 
most  part,  though  not  without  grumbling,  leave  this 
word  in  use  in  their  books,  let  us  enter  into  the 
difficulties  we  have  with  them  over  the  causes  and 
effects  of  the  Sacraments,  and  let  us  see  how  they  in 
this  point  despise  the  Scripture  and  the  other  rules 
of  faith. 



Let  us  begin  with  this :  The  Catholic  Church  holds 
as  form  of  the  Sacraments  consecratory  words ;  the 
pretended  ministers,  wishing  to  reform  this  form, 
say  *  that  the  consecrating  words  are  charms,  and 
that  the  true  form  of  the  Sacraments  is  preaching. 
What  do  the  ministers  produce  from  Holy  Scripture 
for  the  support  of  this  reformation  ?  Two  passages 
only  as  far  as  any  one  knows  ;  the  one  from  S.  Paul, 
the  other  from  S.  Matthew.  S.  Paul,  speaking  of  the 
Church,  says  t  that  Our  Lord  sanctified  it,  cleansing  it 
hy  the  laver  of  water  in  the  word  of  life  ;  and  Our  Lord 
himself,  in  S.  Matthew,^  gives  this  commandment  to 
his  disciples :   Teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 

*  Calv.  Instit.  iv.  14  ;  in  Eph,  v.     Beza  in  sum.  doctr.  de  re  sacram. 
t  Eph.  V.  26.  +  Ult.  19. 

ART.  1. 0.  II.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c,  351 

na^ne  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Two  very  clear  passages  certainly  to  prove 
that  preaching  is  the  true  form  of  the  Sacraments ! 
But  whoever  told  them  that  there  was  no  other 
"  word  of  life  "  than  preaching  ?  I  maintain,  on  the 
contrary,  that  this  holy  invocation :  /  baptize  thee  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  is  also  a  word  of  life  ;  as  S.  Chrysostom  and 
Theodoret  say.*  Just  as  the  other  prayers  and  the 
other  invocations  of  God's  name  are ;  which,  however, 
are  not  sermons.  And  if  S.  Jerome,  t  following  the 
mystical  sense,  would  have  preaching  to  be  a  sort  of 
cleansing  water,  he  does  not  therefore  set  himself 
against  the  other  Fathers  who  have  understood  the 
laver  of  water  to  be  Baptism  precisely,  and  the  word 
of  life  to  be  the  invocation  of  the  most  holy  Trinity, 
in  order  to  interpret  the  passage  of  S.  Paul  by  the 
other  of  S.  Matthew :  Teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  And  as  to  this  latter,  nobody  ever 
denied  that  instruction  should  precede  Baptism  in  the 
case  of  those  who  are  capable  of  it,  according  to  the 
words  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  places  the  instruction  first 
and  the  Baptism  afterwards.  But  keeping  within  the 
same  words,  we  place  the  previous  instruction  by 
itself,  as  a  disposition  requisite  to  him  who  has  the 
use  of  reason,  and  Baptism  also  apart :  so  that  the 
one  cannot  be  the  form  of  the  other.  Indeed  Bap- 
tism would  rather  be  the  form  of  preaching  than 
preaching  of  Baptism,  if  one  must  be  the  form  of  the 
other ;  since  the  form  cannot  precede  but  must  follow 
the  matter,  and  preaching  precedes  Baptism,  while 
*  In  Eph.  V.  t  In  idem. 

352  The  Catholic  Controversy.        [part  m 

Baptism  follows  upon  the  preaching.  Wherefore 
S.  Augustine  would  not  have  spoken  correctly  when 
he  said :  "  the  word  comes  to  the  element  and  the 
Sacrament  is  made  ; "  *  for  he  would  rather  have  had 
to  say  :  the  element  comes  to  the  word. 

These  two  passages  then  are  wholly  inapplicable  to 
your  reformed  teaching ;  yet  they  are  all  you  have. 

At  the  same  time  your  pretensions  would  be  some- 
what more  tolerable  if  we  had  not  in  the  Scripture 
contrary  reasons  more  express  beyond  all  comparison 
than  yours  are.  They  are  these.  He  who  helieves 
and  is  baptized :  do  you  see  this  belief  which  springs 
in  us  by  preaching  separated  from  Baptism  ? — they 
are  then  two  distinct  things,  preaching  and  Baptism. 
Who  doubts  but  that  S.  Paul  catechised  and  instructed 
in  the  faith  many  Corinthians  who  were  baptized  ? 
But  if  instruction  and  preaching  were  the  form  of 
Baptism,  S.  Paul  was  not  right  in  saying :  t  /  give 
God  thanks  that  I  baptized  none  of  you  but  Crispus  and 
Caius,  &c.  For  to  give  the  form  to  a  thing,  is  it  not 
to  do  it  ?  The  case  is  made  stronger  still  in  that  S. 
Paul  separates  baptizing  from  preaching :  Christ  sent 
me  not  to  baptize  but  to  preach  the  Gospel.  And  to 
show  that  the  Baptism  is  Christ's,  not  his  who 
administers  it,  he  does  not  say :  are  you  baptized  in 
the  preaching  of  Paul  ?  but  rather :  are  you  baptized 
in  the  name  of  Paid  ? — showing  that  though  preaching 
goes  before  still  it  is  not  of  the  essence  of  Baptism, 
as  if  the  Baptism  were  to  be  attributed  to  the  preacher 
and  catechist  in  the  same  way  that  it  is  attributed 
to  him  whose  name  is  invoked  in  it. 

Certainly  any  one  who   nearly  examines  the  first 

*  In  Joan,  Ixxx.  t  i  Cor.  i.  14. 

ART.  1. 0.  II.]        Church  Doctrines^  &c.  353 

Baptism  administered  after  Pentecost  *  will  see  as 
clearly  as  the  day  that  preaching  is  one  thing  and 
Baptism  another.  Wlun  they  had  heard  these  things 
— see  on  the  one  hand  the  preaching — they  had  com- 
punction in  their  hearts,  and  said  to  Peter  and  the  rest 
of  the  Apostles :  JVhat  shall  we  do,  men  brethren  ? 
But  Peter  to  them :  do  penance  (said  he),  and  he 
baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, 
for  the  remission  of  your  sins : — see  on  the  other  hand 
the  Baptism,  put  by  itself.  One  may  see  as  much 
in  the  Baptism  of  that  pious  eunuch  of  Ethiopia 
(Acts  viii.),  in  that  of  S.  Paul  (lb.  ix),  in  which  there 
was  no  preaching,  and  in  that  of  the  good  and 
religious  Cornelius  (lb.  x.) 

And  as  to  the  most  holy  Eucharist,  which  is  the 
other  Sacrament  which  the  ministers  make  pretence 
of  receiving, — where  do  they  ever  find  that  Our  Lord 
made  use  of  preaching  ?  S.  Paul  teaches  the  Corin- 
thians how  the  Supper  should  be  celebrated,  but  we 
do  not  find  that  there  is  any  command  to  preach; 
and  in  order  that  nobody  should  doubt  but  that  the 
rite  he  was  expounding  was  legitimate,  he  says  that 
he  had  so  learnt  it  from  Our  Lord :  For  I  have  received 
of  the  Lord  that  which  also  I  delivered  to  you.lf  Our 
Lord  indeed  made  an  admirable  discourse,  related  by 
S.  John ;  but  this  was  not  for  the  mystery  of  the 
Supper,  which  was  already  completed. 

We  do  not  say  that  it  is  not  becoming  to  instruct 
the  people  about  the  Sacraments  conferred  upon  them, 
but  only  that  this  instruction  is  not  the  form  of  the 
Sacraments.  So  that  if  in  the  institution  of  these 
divine    mysteries,   and   in   the    very   practice   of    the 

*  Acts  ii.  37,  ^8.  f  i  Cor.  xi.  23. 

III.  Z 

354  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parthi. 

Apostles,  we  find  a  distinction  between  preaching  and 
the  Sacraments,  by  what  authority  shall  we  confound 
them  together  ? 

In  this  point,  then,  according  to  the  Scriptures, 
we  are  absolutely  victorious,  and  the  ministers  are 
convicted  of  violating  the  Scriptures,  since  they  would 
change  the  essence  of  the  Sacraments  contrarily  to 
their  institution. 

Again,  they  violate  Tradition,  the  authority  of  the 
Church,  of  Councils,  of  the  Popes,  and  of  the  Fathers, 
who  have  all  believed  and  do  believe  that  the  Baptism 
of  little  children  is  true  and  legitimate.  But  how 
would  we  have  preaching  employed  therein  ?  Infants 
do  not  understand  what  one  says  to  them ;  they  are 
not  capable  of  using  reason;  what  is  the  use  of  in- 
structing them  ?  We  might  indeed  preach  before 
them,  but  it  would  be  of  no  use ;  for  their  under- 
standing is  not  yet  open  to  receive  instruction,  as 
instruction ;  it  touches  them  not,  nor  can  it  be  applied 
to  them, — what  effect  then  can  it  have  on  them  ? 
The  Baptism  therefore  would  be  vain,  since  it  would  be 
without  form,  and  therefore  the  form  of  Baptism  is  not 
preaching.  Luther  answers  *  that  infants  do  feel  the 
actual  movements  of  faith,  by  preaching.  This  is  to 
violate  and  belie  experience  and  also  common  sense. 

Further,  the  greater  part  of  the  Baptisms  which 
are  administered  in  the  Catholic  Church  are  adminis- 
tered without  any  preaching :  they  are  therefore  not 
true  Baptisms,  since  the  form  is  lacking  to  them. 
Why  then  do  you  not  rebaptize  those  who  go  from 
our  Church  to  yours  ?     It  would  be  an  anabaptism. 

So  then  behold  how,  according  to  the  rules  of  the 
*  Contra  Coch.  an.  1523. 

ART.  I.  c.  II.]        Church  Doctrines,  &c.  355 

faith,  and  principally  according  to  Holy  Scripture, 
your  ministers  err,  when  they  teach  you  that  preach- 
ing is  the  form  of  the  Sacraments.  But  let  us  see 
if  what  we  believe  be  more  conformable  to  the  Holy 
Word.  We  say  that  the  form  of  the  Sacraments 
is  a  consecratory  word,  a  word  of  benediction  or 
invocation.  Is  there  anything  so  clear  in  Scripture  ? 
Tecicli  all  nations,  hajptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Is  not 
this  form — in  the  name  of  the  Father — invocative  ? 
Certainly  the  same  S.  Peter  who  says  to  the  Jews :  * 
Do  jpenance  and  he  baptized  every  one  of  yotc  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  ^'emission  of  your  sins,  says 
shortly  afterwards  to  the  lame  man  at  the  Beautiful 
Gate  of  the  Temple  :  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of 
Nazarethj  rise  iip  and  walk.  Who  does  not  see  that 
this  last  prayer  is  invocative,  and  why  not  the  first, 
which  is  in  substance  the  same  ?  So  S.  Paul  does 
not  say :  The  chalice  of  preaching  of  which  we  preach 
is  it  not  the  communication  of  the  blood  of  Christ? 
— but,  on  the  contrary :  The  chalice  of  benediction 
which  we  bless.f  They  consecrated  it  then  and  blessed 
it.  So  at  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (c.  25):  "The 
deacon  may  not  bless  the  chalice.'*  S.  Denis  calls 
them  consecratory ,J  and  in  his  description  of  the 
Liturgy  or  Mass,  he  does  not  mention  preaching,  so 
far  was  he  from  considering  it  to  be  the  form  of  the 
Eucharist.  In  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  where  the 
order  of  the  Mass  is  spoken  of,  nothing  is  said  of 
preaching,  which  was,  therefore,  a  thing  of  propriety, 
but  not  of  the  essence  of  this  mystery.  Justin  Martyr 
{Apol.  I.  65),  describing  the  ancient  office  which  the 

*  Acts  ii.  t  I  Cor.  x.  i6.  +  De  Eccl.  Hier.  ult. 

35^  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parthi. 

Christians  performed  on  Sundays,  amongst  other  things 
says  that  after  the  general  prayers  they  offered  bread, 
wine,  and  water  ;  then  the  prelate  made  earnest  prayers 
and  thanksgivings  \e,ucliaTistias\  to  God ;  the  people 
gave  thanks,  saying,  Amen :  "  these  things  being 
consecrated,  with  the  Eucharist,  every  one  participates, 
and  the  same  things  are  given  to  the  Deacons,  to  be 
carried  to  the  absent."  *  Several  things  are  noticeable 
here :  water  was  mingled  with  the  wine,  they  offered, 
they  consecrated,  they  carried  it  to  the  sick.  But  if  our 
reformers  had  been  there,  it  would  have  been  necessary 
to  carry  the  preaching  to  the  sick,  or  nothing  would 
have  been  done.  For  as  John  Calvin  says :  t  "  The 
simple  explanation  of  the  mystery  to  the  people, 
makes  a  dead  element  begin  to  be  a  sacrament."  S. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  says :  J  "  I  consider  that  now  the 
bread  is  sanctified  by  the  Word  of  God ;  "  and — he  is 
speaking  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar, — "  we  be- 
lieve that  it  is  changed  into  the  body  of  the  Word." 
And  afterwards  he  says  that  this  change  is  made  "  in 
virtue  of  the  benediction."  "  How,"  says  the  great 
S.  Ambrose,^  "  can  that  which  is  bread  become  the 
body  of  Christ  ? — by  consecration  :  "  and  further  on  : 
"It  was  not  the  body  of  Christ  before  consecration, 
but,  after  the  consecration,  I  tell  thee  it  now  is  the 
body  of  Christ ; " — and  you  may  see  him  at  great 
length.  But  I  reserve  myself  on  this  subject  for 
when  we  shall  be  treating  of  the  holy  Mass. 

*  We  translate  the  Saint's  quotation  as  it  stands.  In  the  text  of 
S.  Justin  the  word  eucharista  is  certainly  used  in  a  technical  sense. 
He  speaks  particularly  of  "  the  bread,  wine,  and  water  in  which  thanks- 
giving (or  eucharist)  is  made."     [Tr.] 

t  In  Ep.  ad  Eph.  v.  X  Omt  Catech.  mag.  cap.  37. 

§  De  Sac.  iv.  14,  16. 

&RT.  Lc.  III.]       Church  Doctrines y  &c.  357 

I  would  finish  with  this  signal  sentence  of  S. 
Augustine :  "^^  "  Paul  could  preach  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  by  signs  of  three  kinds ;  in  one  way  by  his 
tongue,  in  another  by  an  Epistle,  in  a  third  by  the 
Sacrament  of  his  body  and  blood:  but  neither  his 
tongue  nor  his  ink,  nor  significant  sounds  uttered 
by  his  tongue,  nor  the  signs  of  letters  traced  on 
parchments  do  we  say  to  be  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  but  that  only  which,  taken  from  the  fruits 
of  the  earth  and  consecrated  by  mystic  prayer,  we 
duly  receive."  And  if  S.  Augustine  says  :  t  "  Whence 
such  a  power  in  water  that  touching  the  body  it 
should  wash  the  heart,  unless  by  the  effect  of  the 
word,  not  inasmuch  as  it  is  said  but  inasmuch  as 
it  is  believed : " — we  say  nothing  different.  For  in 
truth  the  words  of  benediction  and  sanctification  with 
which  we  form  and  perfect  the  Sacraments,  have  no 
virtue  save  when  uttered  under  the  general  intention 
and  belief  of  the  Church.  For  if  any  one  said  them 
without  this  intention,  they  would  indeed  be  spoken,  but 
for  nothing,  because  it  is  "  not  what  is  said  but  what 
is  believed,"  &c. 



I  HAVE  never  been  able  to  find  any  proof  taken  from 

Scripture  of  the  opinion  which  your  preachers  have 

on  this  point.     They   say   that  though  the   minister 

*  De.  Tiin.  iii.  +  In  Joan.  Ixxx. 

35^  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parthi. 

may  have  no  intention  of  effecting  the  Supper  or 
baptizing,  but  simply  acts  in  mockery  or  in  joke,  yet 
still,  provided  he  does  the  exterior  action  of  the 
Sacrament,  the  Sacrament  is  completed.* 

All  this  is  said  without  reason  given,  without  bring- 
ing forward  anything  but  certain  consequences  un- 
supported by  no  word  of  God,  mere  quibbles.  On 
the  contrary,  the  Council  of  Florence  t  and  that  of 
Trent  J  declare  that  if  any  one  says  that  at  least  the 
intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does  is  not 
required  in  the  ministers  when  they  confer  the 
Sacraments,  he  is  anathema.  These  are  the  words 
of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Council  does  not  say 
that  it  is  necessary  to  have  the  particular  intention 
of  the  Church  (for  otherwise  Calvinists,  who  have  no 
intention  in  Baptism  of  taking  away  original  sin, 
would  not  baptize  rightly  since  the  Church  has  that 
intention)  but  only  the  intention  of  doing  in  general 
what  the  Church  does  when  she  baptizes,  without 
particularising  or  determining  the  what  or  the  how. 

Again,  the  Council  does  not  say  that  it  is  neces- 
sary to  mean  to  do  what  the  Church  of  Kome  does, 
but  only  in  general  what  the  Church  does,  without 
particularising  which  is  the  true  Church.  Yea  if  a 
man,  thinking  that  the  pretended  Church  of  Geneva 
was  the  true  Church,  should  limit  his  intention  to 
the  intention  of  the  Church  of  Geneva,  he  would 
indeed  be  in  error  if  ever  man  was  in  error,  in  his 
knowledge  of  the  true  Church ;  but  his  intention 
would  be  sufficient  in  this  point,  since,  although  it 
would  point  to  the  idea  of  a  counterfeit  Church,  still 

*  Luther  in  Ccvp.  Bah.  de  Bapt ;  Calv.  in  Ant.  7. 
t  lu  lubtr.  Arm.  +  Sess.  vii.  11. 

ART.  I.  am.]        Church  Doctrines,  &c.  359 

it  would  only  have  its  real  significance  in  the  idea  of 
the  true  Church,  and  the  error  would  only  be  material, 
not,  as  our  Doctors  say,  formal. 

Further,  it  is  not  required  that  we  have  this  inten- 
tion actually,  when  we  confer  the  Sacrament,  but  it 
is  enough  that  we  can  say  with  truth  that  we  are 
performing  such  and  such  ceremony,  and  saying  such 
and  such  word, — as  pouring  water,  saying :  I  baptize 
thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c. — with  the  inten- 
tion of  doing  what  true  Christians  do,  and  what  Our 
Lord  has  commanded,  although  at  the  moment  we 
may  not  be  attentive  to  this  or  thinking  of  it.  As 
it  is  enough  to  enable  me  to  say,  I  am  preaching  for 
the  service  of  God  and  the  salvation  of  souls,  if 
when  I  begin  to  get  ready  I  have  that  intention, 
although  when  I  am  in  the  pulpit  I  may  think  of 
what  I  have  to  say  and  be  keeping  this  in  memory, 
thinking  no  more  of  that  first  intention :  or  as  it  is 
with  one  who  has  resolved  to  bestow  a  hundred 
crowns  for  the  love  of  God,  then  goes  out  of  his 
house  to  do  it,  and  thinking  of  other  things  distributes 
that  sum ;  for  although  he  keep  not  his  thoughts 
actually  addressed  to  God,  yet  it  cannot  be  said  that 
his  intention  is  not  on  God,  by  virtue  of  his  first 
determination,  nor  that  he  is  not  doing  this  work  of 
charity  deliberately  and  intentionally.  Such  intention 
at  least  is  required,  and  also  suffices,  for  the  conferring 
of  the  Sacraments. 

Now  that  the  proposition  of  the  Council  is  made 
clear,  let  us  go  on  to  see  whether  it  is,  like  that  of 
our  adversaries,  without  foundation  in  Scripture. 
One  cannot  reasonably  doubt  but  that  to  perform 
the  Lord's  Supper,  or  Baptism,  it  is  necessary  to  do 

360  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [part  m. 

what  Our  Lord  has  commanded  to  this  end,  and  not 
only  to  do  it  but  to  do  it  in  virtue  of  this  command- 
ment and  institution ; — for  these  actions  might  be 
done  in  virtue  of  another  commandment  than  Our 
Lord's ;  as,  for  instance,  if  a  man  were  asleep  and 
baptized  in  a  dream,  or  if  he  were  drunk.  The  words 
indeed  would  be  there  and  the  matter,  but  they  would 
have  no  power,  as  not  proceeding  from  the  command 
of  him  who  could  render  them  vigorous  and  effective. 
Just  as  not  all  that  a  judge  says  and  writes  are 
judicial  sentences,  but  only  what  he  says  as  a  judge. 
Now  how  could  one  make  a  difference  between 
sacramental  actions  done  in  virtue  of  the  command- 
ment which  makes  them  fertile,  and  these  same  actions 
done  for  another  end  ?  Questionless  the  difference 
can  only  be  in  the  intention  with  which  one  does 
them.  It  is  necessary  then  that  not  only  should  the 
words  be  pronounced,  but  also  that  they  should  be 
pronounced  with  the  intention  of  obeying  the  com- 
mand of  Our  Lord  : — in  the  Supper, — Do  this ;  in 
Baptism, — Baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But,  to  speak 
plainly,  is  not  this  command,  do  this,  addressed 
properly  to  the  minister  of  the  Sacrament  ?  Without 
doubt.  Now  it  is  not  said  simply  do  this,  but,  do  this 
for  a  commemoration  of  me.  How  can  one  do  this 
sacred  action  in  commemoration  of  Our  Lord,  without 
having  the  intention  of  thereby  doing  what  Our 
Lord  has  commanded,  or  at  least  of  doing  what 
Christians  the  disciples  of  Our  Lord  do ;  in  order 
that  if  not  immediately,  at  least  by  means  of  Christ- 
tians  or  of  the.  Church,  this  action  may  be  done  in 
commemoration  of  Our  Lord  ?     I  think  it  is  impossible 

ART.  I.  c.  III.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c.  361 

to  imagine  that  a  man  can  perform  the  Supper  in 
commemoration  of  Our  Lord  if  he  have  not  the 
intention  of  doing  what  Our  Lord  has  commanded, 
or  at  least  of  doing  what  those  do  who  do  it  in 
commemoration  of  Our  Lord.  It  is  then  not  enough 
to  do  what  Our  Lord  has  commanded  when  he  says 
do  this;  but  we  must  do  it  for  the  intention  that 
Our  Lord  has  commanded ;  that  is,  in  commemoration 
of  him;  if  not  with  this  intention  in  particular  yet 
with  it  in  general,  if  not  immediately  yet  at  least 
mediately,  meaning  to  do  what  the  Church  does,  and 
she  having  the  intention  of  doing  what  Our  Lord  has 
done  and  commanded.  So  that  one  refers  one's  inten- 
tion to  that  of  the  Spouse,  which  is  accommodated  to 
that  of  the  Beloved.  In  a  similar  way,  Our  Lord 
does  not  say  that  we  are  to  say  these  words,  /  baptize 
theCy  simply,  but  commanded  that  the  whole  action 
of  Baptism  should  be  done  in  the  name  of  the  Father. 
So  that  it  is  not  enough  to  say  in  the  name  of  the 
Father^  but  the  washing  or  aspersion  itself  must  be 
done  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  this  authority 
must  give  life  and  power  not  only  to  the  word  but 
also  to  the  whole  action  of  the  Sacrament,  which  of 
itself  would  have  no  supernatural  virtue.  Now  how 
can  an  action  be  done  in  the  name  of  God  which  is 
done  in  mockery  of  God  ?  In  truth  the  action  of 
Baptism  does  not  so  much  depend  on  the  words  that 
it  cannot  be  done  with  a  power  and  an  authority 
quite  contrary  to  the  words,  if  the  heart  which  is  the 
mover  of  words  and  action  address  it  to  a  contrary 
intention.  Yea  more,  for  these  words  in  the  name 
of  the  Father,  &c.,  can  be  said  in  the  name  of  the 
enemy  of  the  Father ;  as  these  words,  in  truth,  can  be, 

362  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [partih. 

and  often  are,  said  in  lying.  If  then  Our  Lord  does 
not  simply  command  that  we  do  the  action  of  Baptism, 
nor  simply  say  the  words,  but  that  we  do  the  action 
and  say  the  words  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c. ;  we 
must  have  at  least  the  general  intention  of  performing 
the  Baptism  in  virtue  of  the  command  of  Our  Lord, 
in  his  name,  and  for  him.  And  as  for  absolution, 
that  the  intention  is  required  there  is  still  more 
expressly  stated.  WTiose  sins  you  shall  forgive  they  are 
forgiven  them."^     I  leave  this  to  their  consideration. 

And  it  is  in  this  connection  that  S.  Augustine 
says :  t  "  Whence  is  there  such  power  in  water  that 
touching  the  body  it  should  wash  the  heart  except  by 
the  action  of  the  word,  not  inasmuch  as  it  is  said  but 
inasmuch  as  it  is  believed  ? " — that  is,  the  words  of 
themselves  being  pronounced  without  any  intention 
or  belief  have  no  virtue,  but  being  said  with  power 
and  faith,  and  according  to  the  general  intention  of 
the  Church,  they  have  this  salutary  effect.  And  if 
it  is  found  in  history  that  some  Baptisms  given  in 
sport  have  been  approved,  we  must  not  think  it 
strange,  because  one  can  do  many  things  in  play,  and 
yet  have  the  intention  of  truly  doing  what  one  has 
seen  done.  But  we  say  that  is  done  in  sport  which 
is  done  out  of  season  and  indiscreetly,  when  not  done 
by  malice  or  involuntarily. 

[The  following  detached  notes  of  the  Saint  bear 
upon  the  matter  of  this  Third  Part.     Tr.] 

On  the  Episcopal  blessing  with  the  sign  of  the 
cross  we  find  in  the  life  of  S.  Hilarion  (fol.  29): 
Besalutatis  omnibus,  manuque  eis  henedicens. 

*  John  XX.  23.  +  See  end  of  last  chapter.     [Tr.] 

ART.  II.  iNTROD.]     Cktcrck  Doctrifies,  &c,  363 

On  the  intercession  of  Saints  we  must  not  forget 
the  saying  of  Luther,  which  he  wrote  to  George  Duke 
of  Saxony  (an.  1526  apud  Coch.) :  Initio  rogabo 
'prceterea  et  certissime  impetraho  remissionem  apud 
Domimcm  meum  J.  C,  super  omnibus  quoecumque  II. 
Clem,  vestra  co7itra  verbum  ejus  facit  ac  fecit.  I  ask 
you,  if  this  monk  &c.  [how  much  more  men  of 
holiness  might  beseech  God]  ? 

On  the  veneration  of  the  Saints,  or  of  the  Pope, 
that  must  not  be  forgotten  which  he  said  to  the  King 
of  England  in  a  letter  of  the  year  1525,  found  in 
Cochlaeus  in  the  acts  of  the  year  26.  Quare  his 
litteris  prosterno  me  pedibus  majestatis  tuce  quantum 
possum  humillime. 




r^  '^•''■^^'  h>,:. 

The  Catholic  Church  has  been  accused  in  our  age  of 
superstition  in  the  prayer  which  she  makes  for  the 
faithful  departed,  inasmuch  as  by  this  she  supposes 
two  truths  which,  it  is  maintained,  do  not  exist, 
namely :  that  the  departed  are  in  punishment  and 
need,  and  that  they  can  be  helped.  Whereas,  the 
departed  are  either  damned  or  saved ;  the  damned  are 
in  pain,  but  it  is  irremediable ;  and  the  saved  enjoy 
perfect  bliss: — so  the  latter  have  no  need  and  the 
former  have  no  means  of  receiving  help;  wherefore 

364  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  hl 

it  is  useless  to  pray  to  God  for  the  departed.  Such 
is  the  summing  up  of  the  accusation.  It  ought  surely 
to  suffice  anybody  who  wishes  to  frame  a  right 
judgment  of  this  accusation  to  know  that  the  accusers 
were  private  persons  and  the  accused  the  universal 
body  of  the  Church.  But  still,  as  the  temper  of  our 
age  has  led  to  the  submitting  all  things,  however 
sacred,  religious,  and  authoritative  they  may  be,  to  the 
control  and  censure  of  everybody,  many  persons  of 
honour  and  eminence  have  taken  the  cause  of  the 
Church  in  hand  to  defend  it,  considering  that  they 
could  not  better  employ  their  piety  and  learning  than 
in  the  defence  of  her,  at  whose  hands  they  had  re- 
ceived all  their  spiritual  good, — Baptism,  Christian 
doctrine,  and  the  Scriptures  themselves.  Their  reasons 
are  so  convincing  that  if  they  were  properly  balanced 
and  weighed  against  those  of  the  accusers  their 
validity  would  at  once  be  recognised.  But  unhappily, 
sentence  has  been  given  without  the  party  being 
heard.  Have  we  not  reason,  all  we  who  are  domestics 
and  children  of  the  Church,  to  make  ourselves  appel- 
lants, and  to  complain  of  the  partiality  of  the  judges, 
leaving  on  one  side  for  the  present  their  incom- 
petence ?  We  appeal  then  from  the  judges  not  in- 
structed to  themselves  instructed,  and  from  judgments 
given,  the  parties  not  heard,  to  judgments,  parties 
heard.  Let  us  beg  all  those  who  wish  to  judge  of 
this  difference  to  consider  our  allegations  and  proofs 
so  much  the  more  attentively  as  there  is  question  not 
of  the  condemnation  of  the  accused  party  who  cannot 
be  condemned  by  her  inferiors,  but  of  the  condemna- 
tion or  salvation  of  the  judges. 

ART.  II.  c.  I.]         Church  Doctrines,  &c.  365 



We  maintain,  then,  that  ,we  may  pray  for  the  faithful 
departed,  and  that  the  prayers  and  good  works  of  the 
living  greatly  relieve  them  and  are  profitable  to  them : 
— for  this  reason,  that  all  those  who  die  in  the 
grace  of  God,  and  consequently  in  the  number  of  the 
elect,  do  not  go  to  Paradise  at  the  very  first  moment, 
but  many  go  to  Purgatory,  where  they  suffer  a  temporal 
punishment,  from  which  our  prayers  and  good  works 
can  help  and  serve  to  deliver  them.  There  lies  the 
point  of  our  difference. 

We  agree  that  the  blood  of  Our  Eedeemer  is  the 
true  purgatory  of  souls ;  for  in  it  are  cleansed  all  the 
souls  in  the  world  ;  whence  S.  Paul  speaks  of  it,  in  the 
1st  of  Hebrews,  as  making  purgation  of  sins.  Tribu- 
lations also  are  a  purgatory,  by  which  our  souls  are 
rendered  pure,  as  gold  is  refined  in  the  furnace.  The 
furnace  trieth  the  potter's  vessels,  and  the  trial  of  afflic- 
tion Just  men*  Penance  and  contrition  again  form  a 
certain  purgatory,  as  David  said  of  old  in  the  50th 
Psalm :  Thou  shalt  wash  me,  0  Lord,  with  hyssop,  and 
I  shall  he  cleansed.  It  is  well  known  also  that  Bap- 
tism in  which  our  sins  are  washed  away  can  be  again 
called  a  purgatory,  as  everything  can  be  that  serves 
to  purge  away  our  offences :  but  here  we  take  Purga- 
tory for  a  place  in  which  after  this  life  the  souls  which 
leave  this  world  before  they  have  been  perfectly 
cleansed  from  the  stains  which  tliey  have  contracted — 
since  nothing  can  enter  Paradise  which  is  not  pure 
*  Ecclus.  xxvii. 

366  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [pabthl 

and  undefiled — are  detained  in  order  to  be  washed 
and  purified.  And  if  one  would  know  why  this  place 
is  called  simply  Purgatory  more  than  are  the  othei 
means  of  purgation  above-named,  the  answer  will  be, 
that  it  is  because  in  that  place  nothing  takes  place 
but  the  purgation  of  the  stains  which  remain  at  the 
time  of  departure  out  of  this  world,  whereas  in  Bap- 
tism, Penance,  tribulations,  and  the  rest,  not  only  is 
the  soul  purged  from  its  imperfections,  but  it  is 
further  enriched  with  many  graces  and  perfections ; 
whence  the  name  of  Purgatory  has  been  limited  to 
that  place  in  the  other  world  which,  properly  speak- 
ing, is  for  no  purpose  but  the  purification  of  souls. 
And  agreeing  as  to  the  blood  of  Our  Lord,  we  so  fully 
acknowledge  the  virtue  thereof,  that  we  protest  by  all 
our  prayers  that  the  purgation  of  souls,  whether  in 
this  world  or  in  the  other,  is  made  solely  by  its 
application : — more  jealous  of  the  honour  due  to  this 
precious  medicine  than  those  who  so  highly  value  it 
that  they  undervalue  the  using  of  it.  Therefore  by 
Purgatory  we  understand  a  place  where  souls  for  a 
time  are  purged  of  the  spots  and  imperfections  they 
carry  with  them  from  this  mortal  life. 



It  is  not  an  opinion  adopted  lightly — this  article  of 
Purgatory.      The    Church    has    long    maintained   thia 

AKT.  IT.  c.  11.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c,  367 

belief  to  all  and  against  all,  and  it  seems  that  the  first 
who  impugned  it  was  Aerius,  an  Arian  heretic,  as 
S.  Epiphanius  testifies  (Hser.  75),  and  S.  Augustine 
(Hser.  53),  and  Socrates  (ii.  35) — about  twelve  hun- 
dred years  ago.  Afterwards  came  certain  persons 
who  called  themselves  Apostolus,  in  the  time  of  S. 
Bernard.  Then  the  Petrobusians,  about  five  hun- 
dred years  back,  who  also  denied  this  same  article, 
as  S.  Bernard  (sermons  65  and  66  on  the  Cant,  of 
Cant,  and  ep.  241)  and  S.  Peter  of  Cluny  (epp.  I,  2, 
and  elsewhere)  record.  This  same  opinion  of  the 
Petrobusians  was  followed  by  the  Vaudois,  about 
the  year  1170,  as  Guidon  says  in  his  Summa ;  and 
some  Greeks  were  suspected  on  this  matter,  justifying 
themselves  in  the  Council  of  Florence,  and  in  their 
apology  presented  to  the  Council  of  Basle.  In  fine, 
Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin,  and  those  of  their  party, 
have  altogether  denied  the  truth  of  Purgatory  :  for 
although  Luther,  in  disjnttatione  Lipsicd,  says  that  he 
firmly  believed,  yea  certainly  knew,  that  there  was  a 
Purgatory,  still  he  afterwards  retracted  this  in  the  book, 
J)e  Abrogandd  Missd  Frivatd.  And  it  is  the  custom 
of  all  the  factions  of  our  age  to  laugh  at  Purgatory, 
and  despise  prayers  for  the  dead.  But  the  Catholic 
Church  has  strongly  opposed  all  these,  each  in  its 
cime,  having  in  her  hand  the  Holy  Scripture,  out  of 
which  our  forefathers  have  drawn  many  good  reasons. 
For  (i.)  she  has  proved  that  alms,  prayers,  and 
other  holy  actions  can  help  the  departed :  whence  it 
follows  that  there  is  a  Purgatory,  for  those  in  hell  can 
have  no  help  in  their  pains,  and  into  Paradise,  all 
good  being  there,  we  can  convey  none  of  ours  for  those 
who  are  therein ;  wherefore  it  is  for  those  who  are  in 

368  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [partih. 

a  third  place,  which  we  call  Purgatory.  (2.)  She  has 
proved  that  in  the  other  world  some  of  the  departed 
have  been  delivered  from  their  punishments  and  sins ; 
and  since  this  cannot  be  done  either  in  hell  or  in 
Paradise,  it  follows  that  there  is  a  Purgatory.  (3.) 
She  has  proved  that  many  souls,  before  arriving  in 
Paradise,  passed  through  a  place  of  punishment,  which 
can  only  be  Purgatory.  (4.)  Proving  that  the  souls 
below  the  earth  gave  honour  and  reverence  to  Our 
Lord,  she  at  the  same  time  proved  Purgatory,  since 
this  cannot  be  understood  of  those  poor  wretches  who 
are  in  hell.  (5.)  By  many  other  passages,  with  a 
variety  of  consequences,  but  all  very  apposite.  In  these 
one  ought  so  much  the  more  to  defer  to  our  doctors, 
because  the  passages  which  they  allege  now  have  been 
brought  forward  for  the  same  purpose  by  those  great 
ancient  fathers,  without  our  having  to  make  new 
interpretations  in  order  to  defend  this  holy  article ; 
which  sufficiently  shows  how  candidly  we  act  in  this 
matter :  whereas  our  adversaries  draw  conclusions 
from  the  Holy  Scripture  which  have  never  been 
thought  of  before,  but  are  quite  freshly  started  simply 
to  oppose  the  Church. 

So  our  reasons  will  be  in  this  order,  (i.)  We  will 
quote  the  passages  of  Holy  Scripture,  then  (2.) 
Councils,  (3.)  ancient  Fathers,  (4.)  all  sorts  of 
authors.  Afterwards  we  will  bring  forward  reasons, 
and  at  last  we  will  take  up  the  arguments  of  the 
opposite  party  and  will  show  them  not  to  be  sound. 
Thus  shall  we  conclude  by  the  belief  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  It  will  remain  for  the  reader  to  avoid  look- 
ing at  things  through  the  medium  of  passion,  to  think 
attentively  over  the  soundness  of  our  proofs,  and  to 

ART.  II.  c.  III.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c,  369 

throw  himself  at  the  feet  of  the  divine  goodness, 
crying  out  in  all  humility  with  David :  Give  me, 
understanding  and  I  will  search  thy  law,  and  I  will 
keep  it  with  my  whole  heartj^^  And  then  I  doubt  not 
that  such  men  will  return  into  the  bosom  of  their 
grandmother  the  Church  Catholic. 


LIFE,    AND    OF    A    TIME    AND    A    PLACE    FOR    IT. 

This  first  argument  is  irrefragable.  There  is  a  time 
and  a  place  of  purgation  for  souls  after  this  mortal 
life.  Therefore  there  is  a  Purgatory ;  since  hell  can- 
not allow  any  puigation,  and  Paradise  can  receive 
nothing  which  needs  purgation.  Now  that  there  is  a 
time  and  place  of  purgation  after  this  life,  here  is  the 

(i.)  In  Psalm  Ixv.  12:  We  have  passed  through 
fire  and  water,  and  thou  hast  brought  us  out  into  a 
refreshment.  This  place  is  brought  in  proof  of  Pur- 
gatory by  Origen  (Hom.  25  m  Numeros),  and  by  S. 
Ambrose  (in  Ps.  xxxvi.,  and  in  sermon  3  on  Ps.  cxviii.), 
where  he  expounds  the  water  of  Baptism,  and  the  fire 
of  Purgatory. 

(2.)  In  Isaias  (iv.  4) :  If  the  Lord  shall  wash  away 
the  filth  of  the  daughters  of  Sion,  and  shall  wash  away 

*  Ps.  cxviii.  34. 
III.  2  A 

37o  The  CatJiolic  Controversy.         [paktth. 

fha  hlood  of  Jerusalem  out  of  the  midst  thereof  by  the 
sjnrit  of  judgment  and  the  spirit  of  hurning.  This 
purgation  made  in  the  spirit  of  judgment  and  of  burn- 
ing is  understood  of  Purgatory  by  S.  Augustine,  in 
the  20th  Book  of  the  City  of  God,  ch.  25.  And  in 
fact  this  interpretation  is  favoured  by  the  words  pre- 
ceding, in  which  mention  is  made  of  the  salvation  of 
men,  and  also  by  the  end  of  the  chapter,  where  the 
repose  of  the  blessed  is  spoken  of;  wherefore  that 
which  is  said — the  Lord  shall  wash  away  the  filth — is 
to  be  understood  of  the  purgation  necessary  for  this 
salvation.  And  since  it  is  said  that  this  purgation  is 
to  be  made  in  the  spirit  of  heat  and  of  burning, 
it  cannot  well  be  understood  save  of  Purgatory  and 
its  fire. 

(3).  In  Micheas,  in  the  7th  chapter  (8,  9):  Rejoice 
not,  thou  my  enemy,  over  me,  hecause  I  am  fallen :  1 
shall  arise,  when  I  sit  in  darkness,  the  Lord  is  my  light. 
I  will  hear  the  wrath  of  the  Lord,  hecause  I  have  sinned 
against  him,  until  he  judge  my  cause  and  execute  judg- 
ment for  me :  he  will  hring  me  forth  into  the  light,  I 
shall  hehold  his  justice.  This  passage  was  already 
applied  to  the  proof  of  Purgatory  amongst  Catholics 
from  the  time  of  S.  Jerome,  1200  years  ago,  as  the 
same  S.  Jerome  witnesses  by  the  last  chapter  of  Isaias ; 
where  he  says  that  the — luhen  I  shall  sit  in  darkness  .  .  . 
I  will  hear  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  .  .  .  until  He  judge 
my  cause — cannot  be  understood  of  any  pain  so  properly 
as  of  that  of  Purgatory. 

(4.)  In  Zachary  (ix.  11):  Thou  also  hy  the  hlood 
of  thy  testament  hast  sent  forth  thy  prisoners  out  of  the 
'pit  wherein  is  no  water.  The  pit  from  which  these 
prisoners  are  drawn  is  the  Purgatory  from  which  Our 

ART.  II.  o.  m.]     Church  Doctrines,  &c,  37  ^ 

Lord  delivered  them  in  his  descent  into  hell,  and 
cannot  be  understood  of  Limbo,  where  the  Fathers 
were  before  the  resurrection  of  Our  Lord  in  Abraham's 
bosom,  because  there  was  water  of  consolation  there, 
as  may  be  seen  in  Luke  xvi.  Whence  S.  Augustine, 
in  the  90th  Epistle,  to  Evodius,  says  that  Our  Lord 
visited  those  who  were  being  tormented  in  hell,  that 
is,  in  Purgatory,  and  that  he  delivered  them  from  it; 
whence  it  follows  that  there  is  a  place  where  the 
faithful  are  held  prisoners  and  whence  they  can  be 

(5.)  In  Malachy  (iii.  3)  :  And  he  shall  sit  refining 
and  cleansing  the  silver  :  and  he  shall  purify  the  sons 
of  Levi,  and  shall  refine  them  as  gold  and  as  silver,  &c. 
This  place  is  expounded  of  a  purifying  punishment  by 
Origen  (Hom.  6  on  Exodus),  S.  Ambrose  (on  Ps. 
xxxvi.),  St.  Augustine  {de  civ.  Dei  xx.  25),  and  S. 
Jerome  (on  this  place).  We  are  quite  aware  that 
they  understand  it  of  a  purgation  which  will  be  at  the 
end  of  the  world  by  the  general  fire  and  conflagration, 
in  which  will  be  purged  away  the  remains  of  the 
sins  of  those  who  will  be  found  alive ;  but  we  still 
are  able  to  draw  from  this  a  good  argument  for  our 
Purgatory.  Eor  if  persons  at  that  time  have  need  of 
purgation  before  receiving  the  effects  of  the  benediction 
of  the  supreme  Judge,  why  shall  not  those  also  have 
need  of  it  who  die  before  that  time,  since  some  of 
these  may  be  found  at  death  to  have  remains  of  their 
imperfections.  In  truth  if  Paradise  cannot  receive 
any  stains  at  that  time,  neither  will  it  receive  them  any 
better  at  present.  S.  Irenseus  in  this  connection,  in 
chapter  29  of  Book  V.,  says  that  because  the  militant 
Church  is  then  to  mount  up  to  the  heavenly  palace 

372  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parthl 

of  the  Spou>se,  and  will  no  longer  have  time  for  pur-* 
gatioD,  her  faults  and  stains  will  there  and  then  be 
purged  away  by  this  fire  which  will  precede  the  judg- 

(6.)  I  leave  on  one  side  the  passage  of  Psalm  xxxvii 
—  0  Lord,  rebuke  me  not  in  thine  indignation  nor 
chastise  me  in  thy  wrath: — which  S.  Augustine  inter- 
prets of  hell  and  Purgatory  in  such  sense  that  to  be 
rebuked  in  indignation  refers  to  the  eternal  pains,  and 
to  be  chastised  *  in  wrath  refers  to  Purgatory. 



In  the  ist  Corinthians  (iii.  13,  14,  15):  The  day  of 
the  Lord  shall  declare  {every  mans  work),  because  it  shall 
he  revealed  by  fire^  and  the  fire  shall  try  every  mans 
work,  of  what  sort  it  is.  If  any  man's  ivork  abide 
which  he  hath  built  thereupon^  he  shall  receive  a  reward. 
If  any  man's  work  burn,  he  shall  suffer  loss:  but  he 
himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire.  This  passage 
has  always  been  held  as  one  of  the  important  and 
difficult  ones  of  the  whole  Scripture.  Now  in  it,  as  is 
easily  seen  by  one  who  considers  the  whole  chapter, 
the  Apostle  uses  two  similitudes.  The  first  is  of  an 
architect  who  with  solid  materials  builds  a  valuable 
house  on  a  rock :  the  second  is  of  one  who  on  the 

*  Corri'pi ;  i.e.,  to  be  corrected  by  chastisement.     [Tr.] 

ART.  II.  c.  iv.j      Church  Doctrmes,  &c.  373 

same  foundation  erects  a  house  of  boards,  reeds,  straw. 
Let  us  now  imagine  that  a  fire  breaks  out  in  both  the 
houses.  That  which  is  of  solid  material  will  be  out  of 
danger,  and  the  other  will  be  burnt  to  ashes.  And  if 
the  architect  be  in  the  first  he  will  be  whole  and  safe ; 
if  he  be  in  the  second,  he  must,  if  he  would  escape, 
rush  through  fire  and  flame,  and  shall  be  saved  yet  so 
that  he  will  bear  the  marks  of  having  been  in  fire  : 
he  himself  shall  he  saved ^  yet  so  as  hyjire.  The  founda- 
tion spoken  of  in  this  similitude  is  Our  Lord,  of  whom 
S.  Paul  says :  I  have  -planted  .  .  .  and  as  a  wise 
architect  I  have  laid  the  foundation :  .  .  .  and  then 
afterwards  :  For  no  one  can  lay  another  foundation  hut 
that  which  is  laid  ;  which  is  Christ  Jestcs.  The  archi- 
tects are  the  preachers  and  doctors  of  the  Gospel,  as 
may  be  known  by  considering  attentively  the  words  of 
this  whole  chapter.  And  as  S.  Ambrose  interprets, 
and  also  Sedulius  on  this  place,  the  day  of  the  Lord 
which  is  spoken  of  means  the  day  of  judgment, 
which  in  the  Scripture  is  ordinarily  called  the  day 
of  the  Lord, — as  in  Joel  ii. :  the  day  of  the  Lord  ;  in 
Sophonias  i. :  the  day  of  the  Lord  is  near  ;  and  in  the 
word  that  follows  in  our  passage  :  the  day  of  the  Lord 
shall  declare  it ;  for  it  is  on  that  day  that  all  the 
actions  of  the  world  will  be  declared  in  fire.  When 
the  Apostle  says  it  shall  he  revealed  hy  fire,  he  suffi- 
ciently shows  that  it  is  the  last  day  of  judgment;  [as] 
in  the  Second  to  the  Thessalonians  i. :  ivhen  the  Lord 
Jesics  shall  he  revealed  from  heaven  ivith  the  angels  of 
his  power,  in  aflame  of  fire  ;  and  in  Psalm  xcvi. :  fire 
shall  go  hefore  his  face.  The  fire  by  which  the  archi- 
tect is  saved — he  himself  shall  he  saved  yet  so  as  hy 
fire — can  only  be  understood  of  the  fire  of  Purgatory* 

374  ^-^^  Catholic  Co7it7^oversy.         [partih. 

For  when  the  Apostle  says  lu  shall  he  saved,  he  ex- 
cludes the  fire  of  hell  in  which  no  one  can  be  saved ; 
and  when  he  says  he  shall  he  saved  hy  fire,  and  speaks 
only  of  him  who  has  built  on  the  foundation,  wood, 
straw,  stubble,  he  shows  that  he  is  not  speaking  of  the 
fire  which  will  precede  the  day  of  judgment,  since  by 
this  will  pass  not  only  those  who  shall  have  built  with 
these  light  materials,  but  also  those  who  shall  have 
built  in  gold,  silver,  &c.  All  this  interpretation,  besides 
that  it  agrees  very  well  with  the  text,  is  also  most 
authentic,  as  having  been  followed  with  common  con- 
sent by  the  ancient  Fathers.  S.  Cyprian  (Bk.  iv.  ep. 
2)  seems  to  make  allusion  to  this  passage.  S.  Ambrose, 
on  this  place,  S.  Jerome  on  the  4th  of  Amos,  S. 
Augustine  on  Psalm  xxxvi.,  S.  Gregory  {Dial.  iv.  39), 
Rupert  (in  Gen.  iii.  32),  and  the  rest,  are  all  express 
on  the  point;  and  of  the  Greeks,  Origen  in  the  6th 
Homily  on  Exodus,  Ecumeuius  on  this  passage  (where 
he  brings  forward  S.  Basil),  and  Theodoret  quoted  by 
S.  Thomas  in  the  ist  Opusculum  contra  errores  Grcec. 

It  may  be  said  that  in  this  interpretation  there  is 
an  equivocation  and  impropriety,  inasmuch  as  the 
fire  spoken  of  is  taken  now  for  that  of  rurgatory, 
now  for  that  which  will  precede  the  day  of  judgment. 
We  answer  that  it  is  a  graceful  manner  of  speech, 
by  the  contrasting  these  two  fires.  For  notice  the 
meaning  of  the  sentence  :  the  day  of  the  Lord  shall 
have  light  from  the  fire  which  will  go  before  it,  and 
as  this  day  shall  be  lighted  up  by  the  fire,  so  this 
same  day  by  the  judgment  shall  cast  light  on  the 
merit  and  defect  of  each  work ;  and  as  each  work 
shall  be  brought  clearly  out,  so  the  workers  who  will 
have  worked  with  imperfection  shall  be  saved  by  the 

ART.  II.  c.  IV.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c.  375 

fire  of  Purgatory.  But  besides  this,  if  we  should  say 
that  S.  Paul  uses  the  same  word  in  different  senses 
in  the  same  passage  it  would  be  no  new  thing,  for  he 
employs  words  in  this  way  in  other  places,  but  so 
properly  that  this  serves  as  an  ornament  to  his 
language:  as  in  the  2d  of  Corinthians,  5th  chapter: 
Him  who  knew  no  sin  for  us  he  hath  made  sin : — where 
who  sees  not  that  sm  in  the  first  part  is  taken  in  its 
proper  sense,  for  iniquity ;  and  the  second  time 
figuratively,  for  him  who  bears  the  penalty  of  sin  ? 

It  may  be  said  again  that  it  is  not  said  that  he 
will  be  saved  hy  fire,  but  as  hy  fire,  and  that  therefore 
we  cannot  conclude  there  is  a  Purgatorial  fire,  I 
answer  that  there  is  a  true  similitude  in  this  passage. 
Por  the  Apostle  means  to  say  that  he  whose  works 
are  not  absolutely  solid  will  be  saved,  like  the 
architect  who  escapes  from  the  fire,  but  at  the  same 
time  not  without  passing  through  the  fire ;  a  fire  of  a 
different  quality  from  that  which  burns  in  this  world. 
It  is  enough  that  from  this  passage  we  evidently  con- 
clude that  many  who  will  gain  possession  of  the 
kingdom  of  paradise  will  pass  through  fire:  now 
this  will  not  be  the  fire  of  hell,  nor  the  fire  which 
will  precede  the  judgment ;  it  will  therefore  be  the 
fire  of  Purgatory.  The  passage  is  difficult  and 
troublesome,  but  well  considered  it  gives  us  a  manifest 
conclusion  for  our  contention. 

So  much  then  as  to  the  passages  of  Scripture  by 
which  we  can  learn  that  after  this  life  there  are  a 
time  and  a  place  of  purgation. 

Zl^  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [part  m 



The  second  argument  which  we  draw  from  the  Holy 
Word  in  favour  of  Purgatory  is  taken  from  the 
Second  of  the  Machabees,  chapter  xii.  ;  where  the 
Scripture  relates  that  Judas  Machabaeus  sent  to  Jeru- 
salem twelve  thousand  drachms  of  silver  for  sacrifice 
to  be  offered  for  the  sins  of  the  dead,  and  afterwards 
it  says :  It  is  therefore  a  holy  and  luholcsovie  thought 
to  pray  for  the  dead,  that  they  may  he  loosed  from  sins. 
For  thus  do  we  argue.  It  is  a  holy  and  wholesome 
thought  to  pray  for  the  dead  that  they  may  be  loosed 
from  their  sins ;  therefore  after  death  there  will  be 
time  and  place  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  but  this 
place  cannot  be  either  hell  or  Paradise,  therefore  it  is 
Purgatory.  This  argument  is  so  correct  that  to 
answer  it  our  adversaries  deny  the  authority  of  the 
Book  of  Machabees,  and  hold  it  to  be  apocryphal,  but 
in  reality  this  is  for  lack  of  any  other  answer.  For 
this  Book  has  been  held  as  authentic  and  sacred  by 
the  third  Council  of  Carthage  (c.  47),  which  was  held 
about  1200  years  ago,  and  at  which  S.  Augustine 
assisted,  as  Prosper  says  {in  Chron.) ;  and  by  Innocent 
I.  in  the  Epistle  to  Exuperius ;  and  by  S.  Augustine 
in  the  1 8th  Book  of  the  City  of  God,  c.  36, — whose 
words  are  these  :  "  It  is  the  Catholic  Church  which 
holds  these  books  canonical,  and  not  the  Jews ; " 
and  by  the  same  S.  Augustine,  in  the  book  De  Doctrind 

ART.  II.  c.  v.]       Church  Doctrines,  &c,  2>77 

Christiand,  chap.  viii.  ;  and  by  Damasus,  in  the  decree 
on  the  canonical  books  which  he  made  in  a  council 
of  seventy  bishops ;  and  by  many  other  Fathers  whom 
it  would  be  long  to  cite.  So  that  to  answer  by  deny- 
ing the  authority  of  the  book,  is  to  deny  at  the  same 
time  the  authority  of  antiquity. 

We  know  how  many  things  are  alleged  in  support 
of  this  negation,  which  things  for  the  most  part  only 
show  the  difficulty  there  is  in  the  Scriptures,  not  any 
falsehood  in  them.  It  only  seems  to  me  necessary  to 
answer  one  or  two  objections  that  are  made.  They  first 
say  that  the  prayer  was  made  to  show  the  kind  feeling 
those  persons  had  towards  the  departed,  not  as  if  they 
thought  the  dead  had  need  of  prayer  : — but  this  the 
Scripture  contradicts  by  those  words :  that  they  may 
he  loosed  from  sins.  Secondly,  they  object  that  it  is  a 
manifest  error  to  pray  for  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
before  the  judgment ;  because  this  is  to  presuppose 
either  that  souls  rise  again  and  consequently  die,  or 
that  bodies  do  not  rise  again  unless  by  means  of  the 
prayers  and  good  actions  of  the  living,  which  would 
be  against  the  article  /  believe  in  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead:  now  that  these  errors  are  presupposed  in 
this  place  of  the  Machabees  appears  by  these  words : 
For  if  he  had  not  hoped  that  they  that  were  slain  should 
rise  again,  it  luoidd  have  seemed  superfluous  and  vain 
to  pray  for  the  dead.  The  answer  is  that  in  this  place 
they  do  not  pray  for  the  resurrection  either  of  the 
soul  or  of  the  body,  but  only  for  the  deliverance  of 
souls.  In  this  they  presuppose  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  For  if  they  had  believed  that  the  soul  was 
dead  with  the  body  they  would  not  have  striven  to 
further  their  release.     And  because  among  the  Jews 

^yS  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parthi. 

the  belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  the  belief 
in  the  resurrection  of  bodies  were  so  connected  to- 
gether that  he  who  denied  one  denied  the  other ; — to 
show  that  Judas  Machabseus  believed  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  it  is  said  that  he  believed  the  resurrection 
of  bodies.  And  in  the  same  way  the  Apostle  proves 
the  resurrection  of  bodies  by  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  although  it  might  be  that  the  soul  was  immortal 
without  the  resurrection  of  bodies.  The  followinsr 
occurs  in  the  i  st  of  Corinthians,  chapter  xv.  :  What 
doth  it  'profit  me  if  the  dead  rise  not  again  ?  Let  its  eat 
and  drink,  for  to-morrow  ive  shall  die.  Now  it  would 
not  at  all  follow  that  we  might  thus  let  ourselves  run 
riot,  even  if  there  was  no  resurrection :  for  the  soul, 
which  would  remain  in  existence,  would  suffer  the 
penalty  due  to  sins,  and  would  receive  the  guerdon 
of  her  virtues.  S.  Paul  then  in  this  place  takes  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  as  equivalent  to  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul.  There  is  therefore  no  ground  for 
refusing  the  testimony  of  the  Machabees  in  proof  of 
a  just  belief.  But  if,  in  the  very  last  resort,  we 
would  take  it  as  the  testimony  of  a  simple  but  great 
historian — which  cannot  be  refused  us — we  must  at 
least  confess  that  the  ancient  synagogue  believed  in 
Purgatory,  since  all  that  army  was  so  prompt  to  pray 
for  the  departed. 

And  truly  we  have  marks  of  this  devotion  in  other 
Scriptures  which  ought  to  make  easier  to  us  the  recep- 
tion of  the  passage  which  we  have  just  adduced.  In 
Tobias,  chap.  iv. :  Zay  out  thy  hread  and  thy  wine  on  the 
hurial  of  a  just  man ;  and  do  not  eat  or  drink  thereof 
with  the  wicked.  Certainly  this  wine  and  bread  was 
not  placed  on  the  tomb  save  for  the  poor,  in   order 

ART.  III.  c.  v.]       Church  Doctrines^  &c.  379 

that  the  soul  of  the  deceased  might  be  helped  thereby, 
as  the  interpreters  say  commonly  on  this  passage.  It 
will  perhaps  be  said  that  this  Book  is  apocryphal,  but 
all  antiquity  has  always  held  it  in  credit.  And  indeed 
the  custom  of  putting  meat  for  the  poor  on  sepulchres 
is  very  ancient  even  in  the  Catholic  Church.  For 
S.  Chrysostom,  who  lived  more  than  twelve  hundred 
years  ago,  in  the  3  2d  Homily  on  the  Book  of  S. 
Matthew,  speaks  of  it  thus  :  "  Why  on  your  friends' 
death  do  you  call  together  the  poor  ?  Why  for  them 
do  you  beseech  the  priests  to  pray  ? "  And  what  are 
we  to  think  of  the  fasts  and  austerities  which  the 
ancients  practised  after  the  death  of  their  friends  ? 
The  men  of  Jabes  Galaad,  after  the  death  of  Saul, 
fasted  seven  days  over  him.  David  and  his  -men  did 
the  same,  over  the  same  Saul,  and  Jonathan,  and 
those  who  followed  him,  as  we  see  in  this  [last] 
chapter  of  ist  Kings,  and  in  the  ist  chapter  of 
2d  Kings.  One  cannot  think  that  it  was  for  any 
other  purpose  than  to  help  the  souls  of  the  departed ; 
— for  to  what  else  can  one  refer  the  fast  of  seven 
days  ?  So  David,  who,  in  the  2d  Kings,  chapter  xii., 
fasted  and  prayed  for  his  sick  son,  after  his  death 
ceased  to  fast,  showing  that  when  he  fasted  it  was 
to  obtain  help  for  the  sick  child,  which,  when  it  died, 
dying  young  and  innocent,  had  no  need  of  help ; — 
wherefore  David  ceased  fasting.  Bede,  more  than 
700  years  ago,  interprets  thus  the  end  of  the  ist 
Book  of  Kings.*  So  that  in  the  ancient  Church,  the 
custom  already  was  to  help  by  prayer  and  holy  deeds 
the  souls  of  the  departed : — which  clearly  implies  a 
faith  in  Purgatory. 

*  In  Sam.  L.  iv.  c.  lo. 

380  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parthi. 

And  of  this  custom  S.  Paul  speaks  quite  clearly 
in  the  1st  of  Corinthians,  chap  xv.,  appealing  to  it 
as  praiseworthy  and  right.  ^Vllat  shall  they  do  loho 
are  ha-ptized  for  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not  again  at 
all?  Why  then  are  they  baptized  for  them?  This 
passage  properly  understood  evidently  shows  that  it 
was  the  custom  of  the  primitive  Church  to  watch, 
pray,  fast,  for  the  souls  of  the  departed.  For,  firstly, 
in  the  Scriptures  to  be  baptized  is  often  taken  for 
afflictions  and  penances  ;  as  in  S.  Luke,  chap  xii.,  where 
Our  Lord  speaking  of  his  Passion  says :  /  have  a 
baptism  wherewith  I  ain  to  be  baptized,  and  how  am  1 
straitened  until  it  be  accomplished  ! — and  in  S.  Mark, 
chap  X.,  he  says :  Can  yoih  drink  of  the  chalice  that  1 
drink  of ;  or  be  bap)tized  with  the  baptism  wherewithal 
am  baptized? — in  which  places  Our  Lord  calls  pains 
and  afflictions  baptism.  This  then  is  the  sense  of  that 
Scripture :  if  the  dead  rise  not  again,  what  is  the  use 
of  mortifying  and  afflicting  oneself,  of  praying  and 
fasting  for  the  dead  ?  And  indeed  this  sentence  of 
S.  Paul  resembles  that  of  Machabees  quoted  above : 
It  is  sitperjiuous  and  vain  to  pray  for  the  dead  if  the 
dead  rise  not  again.  They  may  twist  and  transform 
this  text  with  as  many  interpretations  as  they  like, 
and  there  will  be  none  to  properly  fit  into  the  Holy 
Letter  except  this.  But  [secondly]  it  must  not  be 
said  that  the  baptism  of  which  S.  Paul  speaks  is  only 
a  baptism  of  grief  and  tears,  and  not  of  fasts,  prayers, 
and  other  works.  For  thus  understood  his  conclusion 
would  be  very  false.  The  conclusion  he  m^  ans  to 
draw  is  that  if  the  dead  rise  not  again,  and  if  the  soul 
is  mortal,  in  vain  do  we  afflict  ourselves  for  the  dead. 
But,  I  pray  you,  should  we  not  have  more  occasion  to 

ART.  III.  0.  v.]      Church  Doctrines,  &c,  381 

afflict  ourselves  by  sadness  for  the  death  of  friends  if 
they  rise  no  more — losing  all  hope  of  ever  seeing  them 
again — than  if  they  do  rise  ?  He  refers  then  to  the 
voluntary  afflictions  which  they  undertook  to  impetrate 
the  repose  of  the  departed,  which,  questionless,  would 
be  undergone  in  vain  if  souls  were  mortal  and  the  dead 
rose  not  again.  Wherein  we  must  keep  in  mind  what 
was  said  above,  that  the  article  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  and  that  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  were 
so  joined  together  in  the  belief  of  the  Jews  that  he 
who  acknowledged  the  one  acknowledged  the  other, 
and  he  who  denied  the  one  denied  the  other.  It 
appears  then  by  these  words  of  S.  Paul  that  prayer, 
fasting,  and  other  holy  afflictions  were  practised  for 
the  departed.  Now  it  was  not  for  those  in  Paradise, 
who  had  no  need  of  it,  nor  for  those  in  hell,  who 
could  get  no  benefit  from  it ;  it  was,  then,  for  those 
in  Purgatory.  Thus  did  S.  Ephrem  expound  it  twelve 
hundred  years  ago,  and  so  did  the  Fathers  who  disputed 
against  the  Petrobusians. 

The  same  can  one  deduce  from  the  words  of  the 
Good  Thief,  in  S.  Luke,  chap,  xxiii.,  when,  addressing 
Our  Lord,  he  said  :  RemeTriber  me  %vhen  thou  comest  into 
thy  kingdom.  For  why  should  he  have  recommended 
himself,  he  who  was  about  to  die,  unless  he  had 
believed  that  souls  after  death  could  be  succoured 
and  helped  ?  S.  Augustine  (Contra  Jul.,  B.  vi.)  proves 
[from]  this  passage  that  sins  are  pardoned  in  the 
other  world. 

382  The  Catholic  Co7itroversy.         [parthl 



If  there  are  some  sins  that  can  be  pardoned  in  the 
other  world  it  is  neither  in  liell  nor  in  heaven,  there- 
fore it  is  in  Purgatory.  Now,  that  there  are  sins  which 
are  pardoned  in  the  other  world  we  prove,  firstly,  by 
the  passage  of  S.  Matthew  in  chap,  xii.,  where  Our 
Lord  says  that  there  is  a  sin  ivhich  cannot  he  forgiven 
either  in  this  world  or  in  the  next :  therefore  tliere  are 
sins  which  can  be  forgiven  in  the  other  world.  For 
if  there  were  no  sins  which  could  be  forgiven  in  the 
other  world,  it  was  not  now  necessary  to  attribute 
this  property  of  not  being  able  to  be  forgiven  in  the 
next  world  to  one  sort  of  sins,  but  it  sufficed  to  say  it 
could  not  be  forgiven  in  this  world.  When  Our 
Lord  had  said  to  Pilate :  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this 
world,  in  S.  John,  chap,  xviii.,  Pilate  drew  this  conclu- 
sion :  Art  thou  a  king,  then  ?  Which  conclusion  was 
approved  by  Our  Lord,  who  assented  thereto.  So 
when  he  said  that  there  is  one  sin  which  cannot  be 
forgiven  in  the  other  world,  it  follows  very  properly 
that  there  are  others  which  can.  They  try  to  say 
that  these  words,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the  ivorld 
to  come,  only  signify,  for  ever,  or,  never ;  as  S.  Mark 
says  in  chap,  iii.,  shall  never  have  forgiveness.  That 
is  quite  true  ;  but  our  reason  loses  none  of  its  force 
on  that  account.  For  either  S.  Matthew  has  properly 
expressed   Our  Lord's  meaning  or   he   has   not :  one 

ART.  III.  c.  VI.]      Chtirch  Doctrines,  &c,  383 

would  not  dare  to  say  he  has  not,  and  if  he  has,  it 
still  follows  that  there  are  sins  which  can  be  forgiven 
in  the  other  world,  since  Our  Lord  has  said  that  there 
is  one  which  cannot  be  forgiven  in  the  other  world. 
And  please  tell  me — if  S.  Peter  had  said  in  S.  John, 
chap.  xiii. :  Thou  shalt  never  wash  my  feet  either  in  this 
world  or  in  the  other, — would  he  not  have  spoken 
[improperly],  since  in  the  other  world  they  might  be 
washed  1 — and  indeed  he  does  say :  thoio  shalt  not 
loash  my  feet  for  ever.  We  must  not  believe  then 
that  S.  Matthew  would  have  expressed  the  intention  of 
Our  Lord  by  these  words,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in 
the  next,  if  in  the  next  there  cannot  be  remission. 
We  should  laugh  at  a  man  who  said :  I  will  not 
marry  either  in  this  world  or  in  the  next,  as  if  he 
supposed  that  in  the  next  one  could  marry.  He  then 
who  says  a  sin  cannot  be  forgiven  either  in  this  world 
or  in  the  next,  implies  that  there  may  be  remission  of 
some  sins  in  this  world  and  also  in  the  other.  I  am 
well  aware  that  our  adversaries  try  by  various  inter- 
pretations to  parry  this  blow,  but  it  is  so  well  struck 
that  they  cannot  escape  from  it,  unless  by  starting  a 
new  doctrine.  And  in  good  truth  it  is  far  better, 
with  the  ancient  Fathers,  to  understand  properly  and 
with  all  possible  reverence  the  words  of  Our  Lord, 
than,  in  order  to  found  a  new  doctrine,  to  make  them 
confused  and  ill-chosen.  S.  Augustine  {de  Civ.  Dei, 
lib.  xxi.,  c.  24),  S.  Gregory  {Dialog,  lib.  iv.,  c.  39), 
Bede  (in  Marc,  iii.),  S.  Bernard  (Hom.  66  in  Cant.), 
and  those  who  have  written  against  the  Petrobusians, 
have  used  this  passage  in  our  sense,  with  such  assurance 
that  S.  Bernard  to  declare  this  truth  brings  forward 
nothing  more,  so  much  account  does  he  make  of  this. 

384  The  Catholic  Controversy.         [parthi. 

In  S.  Matthew  (v.),  and  in  S.  Luke  (xii.) :  Make,  an 
agreement  with  thy  adversary  quickly,  while  thou  art  in 
the  way  with  him  ;  lest  perhaps  the  adversary  deliver  thee 
to  the  judge,  and  the  judge  deliver  thee  to  the  officer,  and 
thou  he  cast  into  prison.  Amen,  I  say  to  thee,  thou  shalt 
not  go  out  from  thence  till  thoic  pay  the  last  farthing. 
Origen,  S.  Cyprian,  S.  Hilary,  S.  Ambrose,  S.  Jerome, 
and  S.  Augustine  say  that  the  way  which  is  meant  in 
the  whilst  thou  art  in  the  way  is  no  other  than  the 
passage  of  the  present  life :  the  adversary  will  be  our 
own  conscience,  which  ever  fights  against  us  and  for 
us,  that  is,  it  ever  resists  our  bad  inclinations  and 
our  old  Adam  for  our  salvation,  as  S.  Ambrose 
expounds,  [and]  Bede,  S.  Augustine,  S.  Gregory,  and 
S.  Bernard.  Lastly,  the  judge  is  without  doubt  Our 
Lord  in  S.  John  (v.):  The  Father  has  given  all  judg- 
ment to  the  Son.  The  prison,  again,  is  hell  or  the 
place  of  punishment  in  the  other  world,  in  which,  as 
in  a  large  jail,  there  are  many  buildings ;  one  for  those 
who  are  damned,  which  is  as  it  were  for  criminals,  the 
other  for  those  in  Purgatory,  which  is  as  it  were  for 
debt.  The  farthing,  of  which  it  is  said  thou  shalt  not 
go  out  from  theiice  till  thou  pay  the  last  farthing,  are 
little  sins  and  infirmities,  as  the  farthing  is  the 
smallest  money  one  can  owe.  Now  let  us  consider  a 
little  where  this  repayment  of  which  Our  Lord  speaks 
— till  thou  pay  the  last  farthing — is  to  be  made.  And 
(i.)  we  find  from  most  ancient  Fathers  that  it  is  in 
Purgatory :  Tertullian  (Lib.  de  Animd  c.  x.),  Cyprian 
(Epist.,  lib.  iv.  2),  Origen  (Hom.  35  on  this  place  of 
Luke),  with  Emissenus  (Hom.  3  de  Epiph.),  S. 
Ambrose  (in  Luc.  xii.),  S.  Jerome  (in  Matt,  v.),  S. 
Bernard  (serm.  de  ohitu  Humberti).      (2.)   When  it  is 

ABT.  III.  c.  VI.]      Chtcrch  Doctrines,  &c.  385 

said  till  thou  'pay  the  last  farthing,  is  it  not  implied 
that  one  can  pay  it,  and  that  one  can  so  diminish 
the  debt  that  there  only  remains  at  length  its  last 
farthing  ?  But  just  as  when  it  is  said  in  the  Psalm 
(cix.)  :  Sit  at  my  right  hand  until  I  make  thy  enemies, 
&c.,  it  properly  follows  that  at  length  he  will  make 
his  enemies  his  footstool ;  so  when  he  says  thou  shalt 
not  go  out  till  thou  pay,  he  shows  that  at  length  he 
will  pay  or  will  be  able  to  pay.  (3.)  Who  sees  not 
that  in  S.  Luke  the  comparison  is  drawn,  not  from  a 
murderer  or  some  criminal,  who  can  have  no  hope  of 
escape,  but  from  a  debtor  who  is  thrown  into  prison 
till  payment,  and  when  this  is  made  is  at  once  let 
out  ?  This  then  is  the  meaning  of  Our  Lord,  that 
whilst  we  are  in  this  world  we  should  try  by  penitence 
and  its  fruits  to  pay,  according  to  the  power  which  we 
have  by  the  blood  of  the  Eedeemer,  the  penalty  to 
"vvhich  our  sins  have  subjected  us ;  since  if  we  wait 
till  death  we  shall  not  have  such  good  terms  in 
Purgatory,  when  we  shall  be  treated  with  severity  of 

All  this  seems  to  have  been  also  said  by  Our  Lord 
in  the  5  th  of  S.  Matthew,  where  he  says :  He  who  is 
angry  with  his  brother  shall  he  guilty  of  the  jiidgment ; 
and  he  who  shall  say  to  his  brother,  Raca,  shall  he  guilty 
of  the  council ;  hut  he  who  shall  say,  thou  fool,  shall  he 
guilty  of  hell  fire:  now  it  is  only  the  third  sort  of 
offence  which  is  punished  with  hell ;  therefore  in  the 
judgment  of  God  after  this  life  there  are  other  pains 
which  are  not  eternal  or  infernal, — these  are  the 
pains  of  Purgatory.  One  may  say  that  the  pains 
will  be  suffered  in  this  world ;  but  S.  Augustine  and 
the    other  Fathers    understand    them    for   the    other 

III.  2  B 

386  The  Catholic  Controversy,         [parthl 

world.  And  again  may  it  not  be  that  a  man  should 
die  on  the  first  or  second  offence  which  is  spoken  of 
here  ?  And  when  will  such  a  one  pay  the  penalty 
due  to  his  offence  ?  Or  if  you  will  have  that  he  pays 
them  not,  what  place  will  you  give  him  for  his  retreat 
after  this  world  ?  You  will  not  assign  him  hell, 
unless  you  would  add  to  the  sentence  of  Our  Lord, 
who  does  not  assign  hell  as  a  penalty  save  to  those 
who  shall  have  committed  the  third  offence.  Lodge 
him  in  Paradise  you  must  not,  because  the  nature  of 
that  heavenly  place  rejects  all  sorts  of  imperfections. 
Allege  not  here  the  mercy  of  the  Judge,  because  he 
declares  in  this  place  that  he  intends  also  to  use 
justice.  Do  then  as  the  ancient  Fathers  did,  and  say 
that  there  is  a  place  where  they  will  be  purified,  and 
then  they  will  go  to  heaven  above. 

In  S.  Luke,  in  the  1 6th  chapter,  it  is  written  : 
Make  unto  yourselves  friends  of  the  mammon  of  iniquity, 
that  when  you  shall  fail  they  may  receive  you  into 
eternal  tabernacles.  To  fail, — what  is  it  but  to  die  ? 
— and  the  friends, — who  are  they  but  the  Saints  ? 
The  interpreters  all  understand  it  so ;  whence  two 
things  follow, — that  the  Saints  can  help  men  departed, 
and  that  the  departed  can  be  helped  by  the  Saints. 
For  in  what  other  way  can  one  understand  these 
words :  make  to  yourselves  friends  who  may  receive  you  ? 
They  cannot  be  understood  of  alms,  for  many  times 
the  alms  is  good  and  holy  and  yet  acquires  us  not 
friends  who  can  receive  us  into  eternal  tabernacles, 
as  when  it  is  given  to  bad  people  with  a  holy  and 
right  intention.  Thus  is  this  passage  expounded  by 
S.  Ambrose,  and  by  S.  Augustine  (de  Civ.  Dei  xii.  27). 
But   the  parable  Our  Lord   is  using   is  too  clear  to 

ART.  III.  c.  VII.]     Church  Doctnnes,  &c.  2>^y 

allow  us  any  doubt  of  this  interpretation ;  for  the 
similitude  is  taken  from  a  steward  who,  being  dismissed 
from  his  office  and  reduced  to  poverty,  begged  help 
from  his  friends,  and  Our  Lord  likens  the  dismissal 
unto  death,  and  the  help  begged  from  friends  unto  the 
help  one  receives  after  death  from  those  to  whom  one 
has  given  alms.  This  help  cannot  be  received  by 
those  who  are  in  Paradise  or  in  hell,  it  is  then  by 
those  who  are  in  Purgatory. 



S.  Paul  to  the  Philippians  (ii.)  says  these  words  :  That 
in  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee  may  how,  of  things  in 
heaven,  of  things  on  earth,  and  of  things  under  the  earth 
{infernorum).  In  heaven  we  find  the  Saints  on  their 
knees,  bending  them  at  the  name  of  the  Eedeemer. 
On  earth  we  find  many  such  in  the  militant  Church, 
but  in  hell  where  shall  we  find  any  of  them  ?  David 
despairs  of  finding  any  when  he  says :  JVho  shall  con- 
fess to  thee  in  hell  ?  (Ps.  vi.)  So  Ezechias  in  Isaias 
(xxxviii.) :  For  neither  shall  hell  confess  to  thee.  To 
which  that  also  ought  to  be  referred  which  David 
sings  elsewhere  (xlix.  1 6)  :  But  to  the  sinner  God  hath 
said :  Why  dost  thou  declare  my  justices  and  take  my 
covenant  in  thy  mouth  t  For  if  God  will  receive  no 
praise  from  the  obstinate  sinner,  how  should  he  permit 

388  The  Catholic  Controversy,        [part  m. 

the  wretched  damned  to  undertake  this  holy  office. 
S.  Augustine  makes  great  account  of  this  place  for  this 
purpose  in  the  1 2th  book  on  Genesis  (xxxiii.).  There 
is  a  similar  passage  in  the  Apocalypse  (v.) :  Who  is 
worthy  to  open  the  book,  and  to  loose  the  seven  seals  thereof? 
And  no  man  was  able  neither  in  heaven^  nor  in  earth, 
nor  under  the  earth.  And  further  down  in  the  same 
chapter  :  And  every  creature  which  is  in  heaven,  and  on 
the  earth,  and  under  the  earth  .  .  .  I  heard  all  saying  : 
To  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne  and  to  the  Lamb, 
benediction  and  honour  and  glory  and  power  for  ever  and 
ever.  And  the  four  living  creatures  said  Amen.  Does 
he  not  hereby  uphold  a  Church,  in  which  God  is  praised 
under  the  earth  ?  And  what  else  can  it  be  but  that 
of  Purgatory  ? 


AS    AN    ARTICLE    OF    FAITH. 

Aerius,  as  I  have  said  above,  was  the  first  to  teach 
against  Catholics  that  the  prayers  they  offered  for  the 
dead  were  superstitious.  He  still  has  followers  in  our 
age  in  this  point.  Our  Lord  in  his  gospel  (Matt,  xviii.) 
furnishes  us  our  rule  of  action  on  such  occasions.  If 
thy  brother  shall  offend  thee  .  .  .  tell  the  Church.  And  if 
he  will  not  hear  the  Church  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen 
and  the  publican.  Let  us  hear  then  what  the  Church 
says  on  this  matter,  in  Africa,  at  the  3d  Council  of 
Carthage  (c.  29),  and  at  the  4th  (c.  79) ;  in  Spain,  at 

ART.  III.  c.  VIII.]    Church  Doctrines,  &c.  389 

the  Council  of  Braga  (cc.  34,  39);  in  France,  at  the 
Council  of  Chalons  (de  cons.  d.  2,  Can.  visum  est),  and 
at  the  2d  Council  of  Orleans  (c.  14);  in  Germany, 
at  the  Council  of  Worms  (c.  20) ;  in  Italy,  at  the  6th 
Council  under  Symmachus ;  in  Greece,  as  may  be  seen 
in  their  synods,  collected  by  Martin  of  Braga  (c.  6g). 
And  by  all  these  Councils  you  will  see  that  the  Church 
approves  of  prayer  for  the  departed,  and  consequently 
of  Purgatory.  Afterwards,  what  she  had  defined  by 
parts  she  defined  in  her  general  body  at  the  Council 
of  Lateran  under  Innocent  III.  (c.  66),  at  the  Council 
of  Florence  in  which  all  nations  assisted  (Sess.  ult), 
and  lastly  at  the  Council  of  Trent  (Sess.  25). 

But  what  more  holy  answer  from  the  Church  would 
one  have  than  that  which  is  contained  in  all  her 
Masses  ?  Examine  the  Liturgies  of  S.  James,  S.  Basil, 
S.  Chrysostom,  S.  Ambrose,  which  all  the  Oriental 
Christians  still  use ;  you  will  there  see  the  commemo- 
ration of  the  dead,  almost  as  it  is  seen  in  ours.  If 
Peter  Martyr,  one  of  the  learned  men  belonging  to 
the  adverse  party,  confesses,  on  the  3d  chapter  of  the 
I  st  of  Corinthians,  that  the  whole  Church  has  followed 
this  opinion,  I  have  no  need  to  dwell  on  this  proof. 
He  says  it  has  erred  and  failed, — ah !  who  would 
believe  that !  Who  art  thou  that  judgest  the  Church 
of  God  ?  If  any  one  hear  not  the  Church,  let  him  he 
to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  the-  publican.  The  Church  is 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it.  If  the  salt  lose  its  savour  where-- 
with  shall  it  he  salted  ;  if  the  Church  err  by  whom  shall 
she  be  set  right  ?  If  the  Church,  the  faithful  guardian 
of  truth,  lose  the  truth,  by  whom  shall  the  truth  be 
found  ?     If  Christ  cast  off  the  Church,  whom  will  he 

390  The  Catholic  Controversy.        [part  in. 

receive, — he  who  admits  no  one  but  through  the 
Church  ?  And  if  the  Church  can  err,  can  you  not  also, 
0  Peter  Martyr,  fall  into  error? — without  doubt:  I 
will  then  rather  believe  that  you  have  erred  than  the 



It  is  a  beautiful  thing,  and  one  full  of  all  consolation, 
to  see  the  perfect  correspondence  which  the  present 
Church  has  with  the  ancient,  particularly  in  belief. 
Let  us  mention  what  makes  to  our  purpose  concerning 
Purgatory.  All  the  ancient  Fathers  have  believed  in  it, 
and  have  testified  that  it  was  of  Apostolic  faith.  Here 
are  the  authors  we  have  for  it.  Among  the  disciples 
of  the  Apostles,  S.  Clement  and  S.  Denis.  Afterwards, 
S.  Athanasius,  S.  Basil,  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Ephrem, 
Cyril,  Epiphanius,  Chrysostom,  Gregory  JSTyssen,  Ter- 
tullian,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Origen, 
Boethius,  Hilary, — that  is,  all  antiquity  as  far  back  as 
1 200  years  ago,  which  was  the  time  before  which  these 
Fathers  lived.  It  would  have  been  easy  for  me  to 
bring  forward  their  testimonies,  which  are  accurately 
collected  in  the  books  of  our  Catholics; — of  Canisius, 
in  his  Catechism,  of  Sanders  On  the  Visible  Monarchy y 
of  Genebrard  in  his  Chronology,  of  Bellarmine  in  his 
Controversy  on  Purgatory,  of  Stapleton  in  his  Promp- 
tuary.     But  particularly  let  those  who  would  see  at 

ART.  III.  c.  IX.]     Church  Doctrines y  &c,  391 

length  and  faithfully  quoted  the  passages  of  the  ancient 
Fathers,   take   up  the  work   of  Canisius,  revised   by 
Buzaeus.      Certainly,  however,   Calvin  spares   us  this 
trouble,  in  Book  iii.  of  his  Institutions  (c.   5,  S    10), 
where  he  thus  speaks:  "More  than    1300  years  ago 
it  was  received  that  prayers  should  be  offered  for  the 
dead  ;  "  and  afterwards  he  adds :  "  But  all,  I  confess, 
were  dragged  into  error."     We  need  not  then  seek  out 
the  names  and  the  localities  of  the  ancient  Fathers 
to  prove   Purgatory,  since   in  reckoning   their   value 
Calvin  puts  them  at  zero.     What  likelihood  that  one 
single  Calvin  should  be  infallible  and  that  all  antiquity 
should  have  gone  wrong  !     It  is  said  that  the  ancient 
Fathers  have  believed  in  Purgatory  to  accommodate 
themselves  to  the  vulgar.     A  fine  excuse !  was  it  not 
for  the  Fathers  to  correct  the  people's  error  if  they 
saw  them  erring,  not  to  keep  it  up  and  give  in  to  it  ? 
This  excuse  then  is  but  to  accuse  the  Ancients.     But 
how  shall  we  say  the  Fathers  have  not  honestly  be- 
lieved in    Purgatory,  since    Aerius,  as   I    have   said 
before,  was  held  to  be  a  heretic  because  he  denied  it  ? 
It  is  a  shame  to  see  the  audacity  with  which  Calvin 
treats  S.  Augustine,  because  he  prayed  and  got  pi  ayers 
for  his  mother  S.  Monica;   and  the  only  pretext  he 
brings  forward  is  that  S.  Augustine,  in  Book    21    of 
the  de  Civitate,  seems  to  doubt  about  the  fire  of  Purga- 
tory.    But  this  is   nothing  to  the   purpose;   for  it  is 
true  that  S.  Augustine  says  one  may  doubt  of  the  fire 
and  of  the  nature  thereof,  but  not  of  Purgatory.     Now 
whether  the  purgation  is  made  by  fire  or  otherwise; 
whether  or  no  the  fire  have  the  same  qualities  as  that 
of  hell,  still  there  ceases  not  to  be  a  purgation  and 
a  Purgatory.      He  puts  not  then  Purgatory  in  question 

392  The  Catholic  Controversy.        [part  m. 

but  the  quality  of  it ;  as  will  never  be  denied  by  those 
who  will  look  how  he  speaks  of  it  in  chapters  i6  and 
24  of  the  same  Book  of  the  de  Civitate^  and  in  the  work 
De  Curd  Pro  Mortins  Agendd,  and  a  thousand  other 
places.  See  then  how  we  are  in  the  track  of  the 
holy  and  ancient  Fathers,  as  to  this  article  of  Purga- 



Here  are  two  invincible  proofs  of  Purgatory.  The 
first : — there  are  sins  which  are  light  in  comparison 
with  others,  and  which  do  not  make  man  guilty  of 
hell.  If  then  a  man  die  in  them,  what  will  become 
of  him  ?  Paradise  receives  nothing  defiled  (Apoc. 
xxi.)  :  hell  is  too  extreme  a  penalty,  it  is  not  deserved 
by  his  sin :  it  must  then  be  owned  that  he  will  stay 
in  a  Purgatory,  where  he  will  be  duly  purified,  and 
afterwards  go  to  heaven.  Now  that  there  are  sins 
which  do  not  make  man  deserving  of  hell,  Our 
Saviour  says  in  Matthew  (v.) :  Wliosoevcr  is  angry 
with  his  hrother  shall  he  guilty  of  the  judgment ;  and 
whosoever  shall  say  to  his  hrother,  Baca,  shall  he  guilty 
of  the  council  ;  and  whosoever  shall  say,  thou  fool,  shall 
he  guilty  of  hell  fire  {gehennce  ignis).  What,  I  pray 
you,  is  it  to  be  guilty  of  the  gehenna  of  fire  but  to 
be  guilty  of  hell  ?  Now  this  penalty  is  deserved  by 
those  only  who  call  their  brother,  thou  fool.     Those 

ABT.  III.  0.  X.]      Church  Doctrines,  &c.  393 

who  get  angry,  and  those  who  express  their  anger  in 
words  not  injurious  and  defamatory,  are  not  in  the 
same  rank ;  but  one  deserves  judgment,  that  is,  that 
his  anger  should  be  brought  under  judgment,  like  the 
idle  word  (Matt,  xii.)  of  which  Our  Lord  says  man 
%holl  render  an  account  in  the  day  of  judgment, — 
account  must  be  rendered  of  it :  the  second  deserves 
the  council,  that  is,  deserves  to  be  deliberated  about 
whether  he  shall  be  condemned  or  not  (for  Our  Lord 
accommodates  himself  to  men's  way  of  speaking) : 
the  third  alone  is  the  one  who,  without  question, 
infallibly  shall  be  condemned.  Therefore  the  first 
and  second  kinds  of  sin  do  not  make  man  deserving 
of  eternal  death,  but  of  a  temporal  correction ;  and 
therefore  if  a  man  die  with  these,  by  accident  or 
otherwise,  he  must  undergo  the  judgment  of  a  tem- 
poral puuisliment,  and  when  his  soul  is  purged  there- 
by he  will  go  to  heaven,  to  be  with  the  blessed.  Of 
these  sins  the  Wise  Man  speaks  (Prov.  xxiv.) :  The, 
just  shall  fall  seven  times  a  day  :  for  the  just  cannot 
sin,  so  long  as  he  is  just,  with  a  sin  which  deserves 
damnation  ;  it  means  then  that  he  falls  into  sins  to 
which  damnation  is  not  due,  which  Catholics  call 
venial,  and  these  can  be  purged  away  in  the  other 
world  in  Purgatory. 

The  second  reason  is,  that  after  the  pardon  of  sin 
there  remains  part  of  the  penalty  due  to  it.  As  for 
example,  in  the  2d  of  Kings,  chap,  xii.,  the  sin  is 
forgiven  to  David,  the  Prophet  saying  to  him:  The 
Lord  hath  also  taken  away  thy  sin :  thou  shalt  not  die. 
Nevertheless,  because  thou  hast  given  occasion  to  the 
enemies  of  the  Lord  to  blaspheme  for  this  thing,  thy 
child  shall  die  the  death. 

III.  2  C 

3  5282  00078  8771 


Wim  ?  ^  ^Q( 


MAR  1 

'      1^99 








DEMCO    13829810 

STACKS  BT1100.F7  1909x 

The  Catholic  controversy 

3  5282  00078  8771